gnss plan4b

EUROPEAN ORGANISATION FOR THE SAFETY OFAIR NAVIGATION

EUROCONTROL

EUROPEAN AIR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAMME

GNSS-1 OPERATIONALVALIDATION PLAN

2000 – 2005DRAFT

GNSS ProgrammeGNSS-1 Operational Validation

Edition : 0.4Edition Date : 5/2/2001Status : Working DraftClass : EATMP GNSS

DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION SHEET

DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION

Document Title

GNSS-1 OPERATIONAL VALIDATION PLAN

PROGRAMME REFERENCE INDEX EDITION : 0.4

EATMP/GNSS/SBAS/PMP EDITION DATE : 5-2-2001

Abstract

Keywords

CONTACT PERSONS : R. FarnworthE.J. Breeuwer

TEL : 76517248

PROGRAMME

GNSS

DOCUMENT STATUS AND TYPE

STATUS CATEGORY CLASSIFICATIONWorking Draft ã Executive Task o General Public o

Draft o Specialist Task ã EATMP GNSS ã

Proposed Issue o Lower Layer Task o Restricted o

Released Issue o

INTERNAL REFERENCE NAME : G:\GNSS_Programme\GNSS OV\Planning\GOV plan V 0.4B.doc

DOCUMENT APPROVAL

The following table identifies all management authorities that have successively approved the presentissue of this document.

AUTHORITY NAME AND SIGNATURE DATE

SBAS Project Leader Rick Farnworth

GNSS Programme

Manager

John Storey

Navigation Programme

Manager

Roland Rawlings

DOCUMENT CHANGE RECORD

The following table records the complete history of the successive editions of the present document.

EDITION DATE REASON FOR CHANGESECTIONS

PAGESAFFECTED

0.1 16-12-99 First draft

0.2 25-02-00 Second draft All

0.3 03-04-00Included the comments of GOV/3 and PSG/2.Approved by GOV/5

All

0.4 5-2-2001

Major Revision:- General re-organisation of work-packages- Operational work-packages aligned with Navigation

PMP- Include comments of J.P. Dupont on WP ‘MRD to

SRD translation.

All

GNSS-1 Operational Validation Plan 2000 - 2005

Edition : 0.4 Working Draft Page v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION SHEET............................................................................................ ii

DOCUMENT APPROVAL ................................................................................................................. iii

DOCUMENT CHANGE RECORD ..................................................................................................... iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS..................................................................................................................... v

FOREWORD.................................................................................................................................... vii

1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 8

1.1 Overview and Context............................................................................................................. 8

1.2 Objectives and Scope ............................................................................................................. 9

1.3 Major Risks and Constraints .................................................................................................10

1.4 Project Schedule................................................................................................................... 15

1.5 Main Deliverables and Milestones ......................................................................................... 15

1.6 Stakeholders......................................................................................................................... 15

1.7 Opportunities ........................................................................................................................ 16

1.8 Document Structure and Evolution........................................................................................ 16

1.9 Reference material................................................................................................................ 17

1.10 Definitions, abbreviations and acronyms ........................................................................... 18

2 Project Organisation........................................................................................................... 20

2.1 General ................................................................................................................................ 20

2.2 Organisational Structure ....................................................................................................... 20

3 WP 1: Project Management ................................................................................................ 23

3.1 Objectives............................................................................................................................. 23

3.2 Background........................................................................................................................... 23

3.3 WP 1.1: General Management.............................................................................................. 23

3.4 WP 1.2: Project Plan Development ....................................................................................... 24

3.5 WP 1.3: Stakeholder Co-ordination....................................................................................... 24

3.6 WP 1.4: Information Gathering.............................................................................................. 24

3.7 WP 1.5: Education and Publicity ........................................................................................... 25

3.8 WP 1.6: Stakeholder Support................................................................................................ 25

4 WP 2: EGNOS Operational Concept .................................................................................. 26

4.1 Objectives............................................................................................................................. 26

4.2 Background........................................................................................................................... 26

4.3 WP 2.1: Concept Definition................................................................................................... 28

4.4 WP 2.2: EGNOS Navigation Applications ............................................................................. 29


Edition : 0.4 Working Draft Page vi

5 WP 3: Airborne Components.............................................................................................. 30

5.1 Objectives............................................................................................................................. 30

5.2 Background........................................................................................................................... 30

5.3 WP 3.1: Receiver Standard .................................................................................................. 30

5.4 WP 3.2: Functional and Operational Requirements............................................................... 30

5.5 WP 3.3: RNAV Issues........................................................................................................... 31

5.6 WP 3.4: Aircraft Integration................................................................................................... 31

6 WP 4: Early Trials................................................................................................................ 32

6.1 Objectives............................................................................................................................. 32

6.2 Background........................................................................................................................... 32

6.3 WP 4.1: Prototype Tools Development.................................................................................. 32

6.4 WP 4.2 Data collection and evaluation .................................................................................. 32

6.5 WP 4.3 Simulation ................................................................................................................ 33

6.6 WP 4.4: Comparison of measured and simulated data.......................................................... 34

7 WP 5: Signal-in-Space Assessment and Evaluation......................................................... 35

7.1 Objective .............................................................................................................................. 35

7.2 Background........................................................................................................................... 35

7.3 WP 5.1: SIS Standard........................................................................................................... 35

7.4 WP 5.2: Review and understanding of ESA’s work ............................................................... 36

7.5 WP 5.3: Mission Requirements vs. Total System Design ...................................................... 36

7.6 WP 5.4: Tools Development ................................................................................................. 39

7.7 WP 5.5: Data collection and Evaluation................................................................................. 39

7.8 WP 5.6: Simulation ............................................................................................................... 41

7.9 WP 5.7: Comparison of measured and simulated data.......................................................... 41

7.10 WP 5.8: Integrity Validation ............................................................................................... 42

7.11 WP 5.9: Anomaly Investigation.......................................................................................... 42


Edition : 0.4 Working Draft Page vii

FOREWORD

About the Document

- This document describes the plan for the GNSS-1 Operational Validation (GOV) Projectcovering the period 2000 – 2005. The project aims to fulfil one of EUROCONTROL’s commit-ments under the European Tripartite Agreement with the European Space Agency (ESA)and the European Union (EU).

- The GOV plan describes the approach to the Operational Validation of GNSS-1 in the ECACregion. The term GNSS-1 refers throughout this document to the navigation service pro-vided by GPS augmented by EGNOS. EGNOS is the Satellite Based Augmentation System(SBAS) covering the European region.

- The focus in the document is on the operational validation of EGNOS in support of all op-erations down to CAT-I precision approach.

- The operational implementation of EGNOS is in line with the Navigation Strategy for ECAC[NAVSt,99]. It also supports a number of key strategic objectives of the ATM 2000+ strategy[ATM2000+].

- A number of principal work-packages have been identified covering various operational as-pects such as the development of an operational concept for SBAS, aircraft equipment cer-tification and approval, and Signal-in-Space validation.

Responsible Body and Acknowledgements

- This document has been developed within the EUROCONTROL EATMP GNSS Programme inclose co-operation with the EATMP Navigation Programme. Extensive support has been re-ceived from the Member States, the EGNOS Operators and Infrastructure Group (EOIG),and ESA.

- The GNSS Programme Steering Group (PSG) will review this plan. The activities related tothe application of EGNOS will be co-ordinated with the Navigation Programme.


Edition : 0.4 Working Draft

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Overview and Context

1.1.1 Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS) are being introduced, as foreseen in theEUROCONTROL Navigation Strategy for ECAC [NAVSt,99], which envisages a gradual transitiontowards the use of satellite navigation services over the coming 15 years. One of the firststeps towards GNSS implementation is the development of Satellite Based AugmentationSystems (SBAS). In Europe the SBAS, under development by the European Space Agency(ESA), is called the European Geostationary Navigation Overlay Service (EGNOS).

1.1.2 Various Member States, in particular those belonging to the EOIG, are intending to offer airnavigation services based on the use of EGNOS. In order to obtain the maximum benefitsfrom the EGNOS system, all conditions required to start operations need to be in place assoon as possible after the development of the system by ESA has been completed. The keygoal of the GOV project is to expedite the process of establishing these conditions by identi-fying all the tasks that must be carried out and ensuring that they are carried out.

1.1.3 Each State intending to offer EGNOS services will have to go through a validation and ap-proval process. A harmonised approach to the approval and introduction of GNSS-1 into op-erations throughout ECAC will be most efficient and is preferred.

1.1.4 ESA will perform an extensive EGNOS verification campaign but this will focus on the Signal-in-Space as seen by a network of independent reference stations. Within the particular envi-ronment of an aircraft performing an operation, ESA will perform demonstrations but the re-sults of these will not be applicable to the industrial consortium building EGNOS. As a resultadditional validation activities will need to be performed within the EUROCONTROL GOV projectto demonstrate compliance with the EGNOS Mission Requirements Document for Civil Avia-tion [DP157,00].

1.1.5 The EGNOS Safety Case Team (ESCT) developing the EGNOS Safety Case requires theoutput from the operational validation activities. GOV will provide evidence that the systemcan be used to support the intended operations and meets the mission requirements. The re-sults of GOV will form part of the safety case.

1.1.6 Whereas the initial focus of GOV will be on EGNOS, the project will provide knowledge, expe-rience and tools that will be used to support future GNSS validation activities for Ground-Based Augmentation Systems for Category I, II and III precision approach and landing. Theexperience will also contribute to the validation and the next-generation of satellite navigationsystems, in particular GPS Block III and Galileo.

GNSS-1

1.1.7 GNSS-1 refers to the first generation of satellite navigation systems, i.e. GPS andGLONASS, plus their satellite and ground based augmentation systems.

The GNSS-1 mission

1.1.8 The intended use of GNSS-1 by civil aviation in Europe remains to be defined. EGNOS isbeing built to meet the Signal-in-Space requirements for all operations from En-route down toCat-I. Ground Based Augmentation Systems (GBAS) should allow all operations in the TMAdown to Cat-IIIB and possibly Surface Movement Guidance and Control (SMGC). For themoment only GBAS systems designed to meet Cat-I requirements are under development.

1.1.9 The GNSS-1 mission requirements for Civil Aviation are described in [DP157,00]. These re-quirements will form the basis of the validation project. They can be split into two main cate-gories:

• Mission enablers – these relate to the ‘usability’ of the service provided (the servicebeing defined by accuracy and availability). The GNSS-1 mission is not only enabled by



the availability of an accurate Signal-in-Space, but also receivers and operational andcertification procedures, all compliant with the appropriate standards.

• Safety requirements – these relate to a safe service provision (a safe navigation serv-ice being defined by continuity-of-service and integrity). Safety of the provided service isensured through the availability of a reliable and trustworthy Signal-in-Space, receiverand procedural standards (TSOs, PANS/Ops etc.), and appropriate safety managementprocedures.

1.2 Objectives and Scope

1.2.1 The overall objectives of the GNSS-1 Operational Validation (GOV) project are:

1. To support the Member States in achieving the approval for the provision of EGNOSservices;

2. To encourage a harmonised approach to the approval of the provision of EGNOS serv-ices and the use of these services throughout ECAC;

3. To serve as a co-ordination platform for all issues related to GOV.

1.2.2 The scope of activities that will be performed in the GOV project to support the EGNOS ap-proval process is illustrated in Figure 1. A large proportion of the necessary work will be tosupport and encourage, where necessary, the various processes displayed in the picture thatare not directly the responsibility of the GOV project manager. The GOV Project will contrib-ute more directly to the validation that the GNSS-1 Signal-in-Space is compliant with the CivilAviation Requirements.

1.2.3 This scope results in the following four main tasks:

1. Investigate present, planned and future operations and procedures that will be supportedby EGNOS and identify the associated operational requirements;

2. Evaluate whether the EGNOS Signal-in-Space is able to meet the requirements definedfor the different operations, particularly the general requirements stated in the ICAO

GNSS-1 READY FOROPERATIONAL USE

SERVICE PROVIDER READYFOR THE PROVISION OFGNSS SERVICES

• APPROVAL OF AIRBORNE

EQUIPMENT

• OPERATIONAL APPROVAL

AIS(Databases,

NOTAMs,AICs)

PROCEDURES(Flight & ATC)

GNSS-SISStates

Info. Circulars ToUsers

Certification & OpsApproval

JAA TGLs & TSOs

Receiver StandardsMOPS, MASPS

PANS-OPS,PANS-RAC,

Doc.8071Others...

MRDSARPs

Others...

Encourage & Contribute tothe development

SERVICE PROVIDERSIDE USER SIDE

GOV

MATERIAL AVAILABLE FOR:

Contribute to thedevelopment

Contribute tothe assessment

Contribute tothe definition

Encourage thedevelopment

AIRWORTHINESS APPROVAL•

Figure 1. The role of GOV in the GNSS-1 Operational Implementation Process



SARPs [SARPs,00] as well as those specifically defined for EGNOS in the Mission Re-quirements Document for civil aviation [DP157,00];

3. Assess functional and operational capabilities required for operations supported byEGNOS onboard aircraft in order to contribute to an harmonised approach to airworthi-ness and operational approval in Europe;

4. Contribute to the development of relevant guidance material for:

� the design of GNSS flight procedures;

� flight inspection criteria;

� the definition of aeronautical information services (AIS) required for the operationalimplementation of GNSS;

� potential new ATC procedures.

1.2.4 In addition to the above tasks an additional work package has been added covering early tri-als activities. These include simulations using tools developed within the EGNOS projectamong others in conjunction with flight simulation tools. Also early trials will be performed withthe EGNOS System Test Bed (ESTB) in preparation for the real operational validation. Ahigh-level breakdown of the project into its major work packages can be found in the GOVwork breakdown structure, shown in Figure 4.

1.2.5 In support of the various tasks, studies, simulation activities and data collection campaignswill be organised in co-operation with the States. Tools for simulation, data collection & proc-essing will also be developed, as required, to supplement tools already under developmentwithin the EGNOS project.

1.3 Major Risks and Constraints

1.3.1 One of the complications of this project is that the achievement of the overall objective de-pends, to a large extent, on activities that are the responsibility of other groups, not answer-able to the GOV project manager. In particular, the development, validation and approval ofmost of the relevant standards and approvals documents is the responsibility of bodies suchas ICAO, JAA, EUROCAE/RTCA, and various Programmes within EUROCONTROL. However,the GOV Project will need to encourage the required activities and ensure that the develop-ment of the standards necessary for operational approval of GNSS are in the work plans ofthe relevant responsible bodies.

1.3.2 An important input to this will be the definition of the operational requirements and proce-dures. As a result significant input is required from the EUROCONTROL Airspace Managementand Navigation Unit to establish the operational environment, procedures and the corre-sponding navigation requirements. RNAV procedures for operations in the Terminal Area(TMA) and during Approach are under development and the navigation system requirementsare not yet fully defined. One specific area of difficulty is the question of how to perform theallocation of the total aircraft requirements between the different aircraft systems. GNSS-1provides a positioning system that is one input to the overall aircraft RNAV capability. It maybe one navigation input amongst others and it is not clear how much of the total navigationperformance budget should be allocated to any particular element.

1.3.3 Another constraint on GOV is the dependency on the performance of the GPS andGLONASS signals-in-space (SIS), the control of which, despite the existence of standardisa-tion in the SARPs, cannot be influenced by EUROCONTROL or its member States.

1.3.4 The receiver is taken as a given input although it has a direct influence on the overall systemperformance. There is no such thing as a fault-free receiver, as referred to in the GNSSSARPs from ICAO. However, a validated test receiver with accurately specified performancecharacteristics will be required for signal-in-space measurements. This receiver will be identi-fied during the early trials phase.

1.3.5 Although GNSS may provide sufficient navigation performance for many operations they maystill not be possible due to limitations in other airborne components. For example, requirednavigation databases do not fulfil the high requirements and many currently installed flightmanagement systems are not sophisticated enough to fly procedures that could be possible



with the potential improvements in navigation performance. Operational validation maytherefore be impossible due to general RNAV limitations that are external to EGNOS.



Tools Develop-ment

OperationalConcept (with

NAV)

Static Data Col-lection

Flight Trials Simulation Study Contracts Other

2001 � PEGASUS Up-grade

� 1st DatabaseIntegration

� Develop SBASOperationalConcept

� Workshop

� GOV activities

� Set-up of earlydata collectionnetwork

� SBAS ApproachTrial

� Validation ofdata collectionand analysistools

� EGNOS Integ-rity Concept

� GNSS labora-tory develop-ment

� Publicity

2002 � Final databasedevelopment

� Maintain andsupport evolu-tions of dataanalysis tools

� Develop OCCriteria

� ConsolidationOperationalConcept

� Prototype Pro-cedure

� Consolidation ofdata collectionnetwork

� Continued GOVactivities

� Validate dataevaluation andsimulation tools

� Support to OCcriteria devel-opment

� Fly prototypeprocedure

� Continued de-velopment ofsimulation tools

� TBD. � Publicity

2003 � Maintenance +possible evolu-tions

� OC Criteria

� Develop specificflight procedures

� JAA GuidanceMaterial

� EGNOS SISanalysis priorORR

� Pre-operationaltrials

� EGNOS SISanalysis prior toORR

-

� Overall assessESTB, EGNOSand simulations

� TBD.-

2004 � Maintenance � Validate andimplement se-lected SBASapproach pro-cedure

� Consolidate pre-operational re-sults on opera-tional system

� Evaluate realEGNOS in op-erational envi-ronment

� Extrapolation ofmeasurementresults overECAC

� TBD. � Expert supportfor incid. invest.

� Complete stand.and guidan.mat.

2005

- -

� Monitor longterm stability ofEGNOS SIS

- -

� Investi-gate/solve im-plementationdifficulties

� Support EGNOSimplementationin States so farnot involved



Table 1 Main GOV project activities between 2001 and 2005.



ID Task Name1 WP 1: Project Management

2 1.1 General

10 1.2 Project Plan Developm.

15 1.3 Stakeholder Co-ord.

21 1.4 Information Gathering

23 1.5 Education and Publicity

27 1.6 Stakeholder Support

29 WP 2: EGNOS Operational Concept

30 2.1 Concept Definition

36 2.2 EGNOS Navigation Applications

47 WP 3: Airborne Components

48 3.1 Receiver Standard

50 3.2 Functional and Oper. Reqs.

53 3.3 RNAV Issues (FMS+DBase)

55 3.4 Aircraft Integration

57 WP 4: Early Trials

58 4.1 Protot.Tools Development

65 4.2 Data collection and Evaluation

75 4.3 Simulation

79 4.4 Comp of simul and meas data

81 WP 5: SIS Assesm. & Evaluat.

82 5.1 SIS standard

85 5.2 Review of ESA’s work

88 5.3 Mission reqs vs. Total Sys Des

90 5.4 Tools Development

94 5.5 Data collection&Evaluation

105 5.6 Simulation

109 5.7 Comp of simul and meas data

111 5.8 Integrity Validation

114 5.9 Anomaly investigation

Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 42000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Figure 2 GOV Master Schedule



1.4 Project Schedule

1.4.1 The EGNOS project has entered the detailed design and development phase. The currentplans of ESA anticipate the date of the Operational Readiness Review (ORR) to be Decem-ber 2003. ORR is the date when the EGNOS system will be ready for hand-over to theEGNOS operating body. The time between this date and the point in time when the system isready for its intended operation must be kept as short as possible. Initial studies have indi-cated that a period of one year would be required for the operational validation activities. Oneadditional year with reduced activity is included in the schedule to monitor long term Signal-in-Space performance, support new States wishing to offer EGNOS services and to deal withimplementation difficulties. This would place the end date of the GOV project at December2005. There is, however, a strong will to reduce the one-year validation period by initiatingmeasurements and trials before ORR is declared. The EGNOS System Test Bed (ESTB) willbe used to carry out initial validation trials and for prototyping operational procedures. Experi-ence gained with the Test Bed is expected to allow a reduction of the final validation period.

Table 1 illustrates the main activities that are planned between 2001 and 2005, while Figure 2shows the project Master Schedule.

1.5 Main Deliverables and Milestones

The main deliverables of the GOV project are:

q A document showing SARPs and MRD compliance of the EGNOS Signal-in-Space

q A concept for the operational use of EGNOS in the ECAC region

q Guidance material for GNSS-1 procedure design and input for OCP material

q Material as an input for JAA guidance material for certification such as TGLs and TSOs

q Guidance documentation for GNSS-related AIS issues

q Guidance material for GNSS-related ATC issues

q Guidance material for flight inspection

The major milestones are indicated in Figure 2.

1.6 Stakeholders

Internal

• The project is one of the major projects of the EUROCONTROL EATMP GNSS Programmeand is managed by Rick Farnworth.

• The Airspace Management and Navigation (AMN) unit including the Navigation (NAV)and Airspace Organisation and Management (AOM) programmes. GNSS will be one ofthe important enablers of new RNAV procedures under development by the NAV Pro-gramme.

• The Aeronautical Information Services (AIS) Programme, which will define the proce-dures for dissemination of GNSS system status information to Air Traffic Service (ATS)providers and airspace users and will be involved in ensuring quality and accuracy offlight information and on-board navigation databases.

• The Airport Operations (AOP) Unit and Programme, which will be faced with the imple-mentation of GNSS-based approach procedures and possibly SMGCS based on GNSS.

• Frequency Management and Spectrum Defence Service in the COM Unit, which willsupport the protection of the GNSS frequencies.



• Stakeholders Relations Management & International Co-ordination (SMI) Unit, where theInternational Co-ordination Service needs to be briefed on progress within the ICAOGNSS Panel to which the project will contribute.

External

• Airspace Users, who will fly procedures using GNSS-1.

• ESA, which is managing the development of the EGNOS system.

• Air-Traffic Service Providers, in particular those from EOIG States who are participatingin the EGNOS development.

• European Civil Aviation Regulatory Authorities, including the JAA

• ICAO, which sets the global standards

• The European Commission, which is supporting the EGNOS project as part of a multi-modal Trans-European transport network on behalf of the European Community.

• Airports, which will be provided with a new approach capability using GNSS-1

• Industry, which will develop the systems and the user equipment.

1.7 Opportunities

1.7.1 The move towards GNSS, in line with the ICAO CNS/ATM concept, the ECAC Navigationstrategy and the ATM2000+ strategy, will enable the rationalisation of the navigation infra-structure and will contribute to a more uniform navigation capability throughout the region andthe globe. The improved navigation performance provided by GNSS will support further in-vestigations into the benefits of RNAV, particularly in the Terminal area and during the ap-proach phase of flight.

1.7.2 The improvements brought about by GNSS will also contribute to enable further CNS con-cepts such as ADS and free-routes.

1.8 Document Structure and Evolution

1.8.1 Document organisation

This document is a subsidiary plan of the GNSS Programme Management Plan [GNSSCh,01].It is also related to the PMP of the EATMP Navigation Programme [NAVPmp,00] and is in linewith the ECAC Navigation Strategy [NAVSt,99].

1.8.2 Evolution of the document and change control

This project plan is expected to evolve until the EGNOS architecture is finalised at the CriticalDesign Review (CDR), the relevant standards documents have been fixed and the definitiveoperational use has been determined. EGNOS CDR is planned for October 2001, whileEGNOS ORR is expected for November of 2003. After ORR one year of validation activitiesis expected plus one year of signal monitoring, stakeholder support and problem solving.Consequently, this project plan covers in detail plans for the six years from 2000 to 2005.

The document is reviewed by a dedicated GOV working group composed of the MemberStates, ESA and EUROCONTROL, which is monitored by the GNSS Programme Steering Group(PSG) on a regular basis and updated accordingly.



1.9 Reference material

Document Name

ICAO (http://www.icao.org)

[SARPs,00] International Civil Aviation Organisation – Global Navigation Satellite System Panel(GNSSP) – Draft SARPs for GNSS, November 2000, AN-WP/756

[PANS-OPS] ICAO Procedures for Air Navigation Services – Aircraft Operations (Doc 8168)� Volume I - Flight Procedures, 4th edition, 1993, Reprinted May 2000� Volume II - Construction of Visual and Instrument Flight Procedures, 4th edi-

tion, 1993, Reprinted November 1998

[RNP,99] ICAO Manual on Required Navigation Performance (RNP) (Doc. 9613) - 2nd edi-tion, 1999. 44 pp.

[SMGCS, 97] ICAO Manual of Surface Movement Guidance and Control Systems (SMGCS)) 1stedition, 1986. 92 pp. Reprinted June 1997, incorporating Amendments 1 and 2. 95pp.

RTCA/EUROCAE (http://www.rtca.org, http://www.eurocae.org)

[DO229A,98] RTCA Minimum Operational Performance Standards for Global Positioning Sys-tem/Wide Area Augmentation System Airborne Equipment, June 8, 1998

[DO236a,00] RTCA DO-236A, Minimum Aviation System Performance Standards, September13, 2000

JAA/FAA (http://www.jaa.nl, http://www.faa.gov, http://www.ecacnav.com)

[(J)TSOC145] Airborne Navigation Sensors Using the Global Positioning System (GPS) Aug-mented by the Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS).

[(J)TSOC146] Stand-alone Airborne Navigation Equipment Using the Global Positioning System(GPS) Augmented by the Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS).

[TGL2,97] JAA TGL2 Rev 1 (AMJ 20X2) - JAA Guidance Material on Airworthiness Approvaland Operational Criteria for the Use of Navigation Systems in European AirspaceDesignated for Basic RNAV Operations

[TGL3,97] JAA TGL3 Rev 1 - JAA Interim Guidance Material on Airworthiness Approval andOperational Criteria for the Use of the NAVSTAR Global Positioning System (GPS

[TGL10,00] JAA TGL10 - Airworthiness and Operational Approval for Precision RNAV Opera-tions in Designated European Airspace

[TGLXY]

EUROCONTROL(http://www.eurocontrol.int, http://www.ecacnav.com)

[ATM2000+] EATMP ATM2000+ Strategy

[NAVSt,99] Navigation Strategy for ECAC, Issue 2.1, March 1999

[NAVPmp,00] EATMP Navigation Programme Management Plan, 2000

[TPINS,00] Transition Plan for the Implementation of the Navigation Strategy, Version 3.0,24/5/2000, NAV.ET1.ST16-002

[GNSSCh,01] EATMP GNSS Programme Charter, 2001

[DP157,00] Civil Aviation Requirements for EGNOS, Version 3.2, 25/10/00

[GOV-DP05] GOV-DP05, ‘Report on the first GOV-WP3.2 sub-group meeting on “SRD to MRDtranslation’, February 6, 2000



Document Name

ESA (http://www.esa.int

[SRD31] EGNOS AOC System Requirements Document Version 3.1, 16/09/99, E-RD-SYS-E-001-ESA

[VRD20] EGNOS AOC Verification Requirements Document; Issue 2.0

[ORD20] EGNOS AOC Operational Requirements Document, Issue 2.0

[ESTB,**] ESTB User Interface Document, Issue 0 Rev 1(see http://www.esa.int/EGNOS/pages/user_if5.pdf)

FAA

[AC90-96] FAA Advisory Circular AC No: 90-96 - US Department of Transportation – Approvalof U.S. Operators and Aircraft to Operate under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) inEuropean Airspace Designated for Basic Area Navigation (BRNAV/RNP-5).

[NAS,**] FAA Air Traffic SatNav Implementation Plan

[W_ORE,**] WAAS Operational Readiness Evaluation Plan

OTHER

[EOTV,99] EGNOS Operational Test & Validation for Civil aviation – Programme Outline, Re-vision 3, Feb. 99, AZB.

[EOTVW,99] EOTV Workshop Report 1999

[GPV,99] GNSS Performance Validation, NLR

[AENA,98.1] Technical Note on EGNOS Operational Test & Validation; AENA, Draft Issue,10.02.1998 SRD/DP/108

[AENA,98.2] The Role of the ASQF in the EGNOS Operational Test and Validation; AENA, Is-sue 1.0, 08.05.1998

[AENA,99.1] “The operational implementation of the EGNOS system: How to pave the way”. P.Haro et al. Proceedings of the GNSS’99, 4-8 October 1999, Genoa, Italy.

[AENA,99.2] “Working Paper on the scope of the GNSS-1 Operational Validation (GOV) Project– What the scope of GOV should be?”, AENA, 27/10/99

[AENA,99.3] “Inputs on GOV WP2.1 – SIS Assessment”, AENA, 30/11/99

[JHU,99] GPS Risk Assessment Study – Final report, Johns Hopkins University

1.10 Definitions, abbreviations and acronyms

ADS Automatic Dependent Surveillance

AIS Aeronautical Information Services

AMN Airspace Management and Navigation

ANT Airspace Management and Navigation Team

AOM Airspace Organisation and Management

AOP Airport Operations Programme

ASQF Application Specific Qualification Facility

ATC Air Traffic Control

ATS Air Traffic Services

B-RNAV Basic RNAV

CDR Critical Design ReviewEATMP European Air Traffic Management Programme



ECAC European Civil Aviation Conference

EETES EGNOS Early

EGNOS European Geostationary Navigation Overlay Service

EOIG EGNOS Operators and Infrastructure Group

ESA European Space Agency

ESCT EGNOS Safety Case Team

ESTB EGNOS System Test Bed

EUROCAE European Organisation for Aviation Equipment

EVP EGNOS Verification Plan

FAA Federal Aviation Administration

FQR Factory Qualification Review

FTE Flight Technical Error

GLONASS Global Navigation Satellite System

GNSS Global Navigation Satellite System

GNSSP GNSS Panel

GOV GNSS-1 Operational Validation

GPS Global Positioning System

ICAO International Civil Aviation Organisation

JAA Joint Aviation Authorities

NAV Navigation

MRD Mission Requirements Document

NPA Non Precision Approach

NSE Navigation System Error

OC Obstacle Clearance

ORR Operational Readiness Review

P-RNAV Precision RNAV

PA Precision Approach

PACF Performance Assessment and System Check-out Facility

PDR Preliminary Design Review

PSG Programme Steering Group

RNAV Area Navigation

RNP Required Navigation Performance

SAPPHIRE Satellite and Aircraft Database Programme for System Integrity Re-search

SARPs Standards and Recommended Practices

SBAS Satellite Based Augmentation System

SIS Signal in SpaceSMGCS Surface Movement Guidance and Control System

SMI Stakeholder Relations Management & International Co-ordinationUnit

TMA Terminal Manoeuvring Area

TSE Total System Error

tbc to be confirmed

tbd to be determined

WAAS Wide Area Augmentation System



2 PROJECT ORGANISATION

2.1 General

The EGNOS system is being developed by ESA who will perform the technical validation ofthe system against their specified requirements. EUROCONTROL, in close co-operation with theEuropean Air Traffic Service (ATS) providers, will undertake the validation of GNSS-1 for civilaviation users and support activities to ensure that GNSS can be operationally implemented.The European Community will validate that user requirements are met for users other thanaviation.

A number of European ATS providers, comprising France, Germany, Italy, Spain, UK, Swit-zerland and Portugal, are contributing to the EGNOS development. These ATS providers areintending to be the EGNOS Service Provider and to this purpose have formed the EGNOSOperators and Infrastructure Group (EOIG) together with CNES of France and NMA of Nor-way. The EOIG will work in co-operation with EUROCONTROL on the various tasks devoted tooperational validation for civil aviation.

2.2 Organisational Structure

Within EATMP there are various units and programmes that will contribute to the successfulcompletion of this project, as illustrated in Figure 3.

The roles of these groups will be as follows:

• The GNSS Programme will manage the GOV Project. The GNSS Programme communi-cates with its stakeholders through the GNSS Programme Steering Group (PSG).

• The Airspace Management and Navigation Unit will support the GOV activities throughthe work of its sub-groups. The Task Force on Transition Planning for the Implementa-tion of the Navigation Strategy (TPINS) will define the requirements to be supported bythe navigation infrastructure and propose how the navigation infrastructure could be ra-tionalised to fulfil the operational needs in the most efficient manner.

Directorate Safety,Airspace, Airports &Information Services

DSA

G. Paulson

AeronauticalInformation

Management Services

AIM

J. Bayoud

Airspace Management& Navigation

AMN

A. Hendriks

Global NavigationSatellite Systems

GNSS

J. Storey

AeronauticalInformation Services

AIS

C. Cleasby

Airspace Organisation& Management

AOM

A. Hendriks

Navigation

NAV

R. Rawlings

Terminal Area RNAVApplications (TARA)

Navigation Sub- Group

(NSG)

Transition Planning forthe Implementation of

the Navigation Strategy(TPINS)

AMN Team(ANT)

GNSSProgramme

Steering Group(PSG)

Figure 3 Units and Programmes within EATMP contributing to the GOV Project



• The Navigation Programme will have responsibility for a number of work packages spe-cifically those that identify the operational requirements for navigation services and op-erational procedures. The Navigation programme communicates with its stakeholdersthrough the Navigation Sub-Group (NSG). Also under the responsibility of NSG is theTerminal Area RNAV Applications Task Force (TARA) where RNAV requirements are de-veloped and material to be input to JAA is discussed.

• The AOM programme will provide inputs on ATC issues related to the introduction ofGNSS.

• The AIS Programme will provide inputs on AIS and NOTAM issues that are related to theintroduction of GNSS.

2.2.1 Project Internal Organisation

Function NameEATMP Programme

Responsibilities

Project Leader Rick Farnworth

GNSS

General Organisation, Interface withStakeholders

Responsible to the GNSS Programme Man-ager

GNSS Issues Edward Breeuwer,Santiago Soley

GNSS

Support to overall Project Management andExecution

ToolsDevelopment

Sebastien Remark

GNSS

Management of Support tools development

Mission and Op-erational Aspects

Jean-Pierre Dupont

GNSS

Safety issues Bernd Tiemeyer

GNSS

Monitor overall GOV output that needs to feedinto GNSS-1 safety case

RNAV, ATC andOperational is-sues

Roland Rawlings,Gondo Gulean,Jeremy Davidson

Edward Breeuwer

NAV/GNSS

Co-Manage the development of an operationalconcept for the use of EGNOS (WP 2)

Airborne Systems Ed Bailey

Edward Breeuwer

NAV/GNSS

Co-manage activities related to EGNOS air-borne components (WP 3)



WP 2EGNOS Operational

ConceptNav/GNSS Programmes

WP 3Airborne Components

Nav/GNSSProgrammes

WP 1Project ManagementGNSS Programme

WP 1.1General Management

WP 1.3Stakeholder

Co-ordination

WP 1.2Project PlanDevelopment

WP 4Early Trials

GNSS Programme

WP 5SIS Assessment and

EvaluationGNSS Programme

WP 1.4Information Gathering

WP 1.5Education and

Publicity

WP 1.6Stakeholder

Support

WP 2.1Concept Definition

WP 2.2EGNOS Navigation

Applications

WP 3.1Receiver Standard

WP 3.2Functional and

Operational Reqs.

WP 4.1Prototype Tools

Development

WP 4.2Data collection and

Evaluation

WP 4.3Simulation

WP 3.3RNAV Issues

WP 3.4Aircraft Integration

WP 4.4Comp. of meas. amd

simul. data

WP 5.1SIS Standard

WP 5.2Review of ESA’s work

WP 5.3Mission Reqs. vs.

Total System Design

WP 5.4Tools Development

WP 5.5Data collection and

Evaluation

WP 5.6Simulation

WP 5.7Comp. of meas. and

simul. data

WP 5.8Integrity Validation

WP 5.9Anomaly Investigation

Figure 4 GOV Work breakdown structure



3 WP 1: PROJECT MANAGEMENT

Workpackage leader: EUROCONTROL GNSS Programme

3.1 Objectives

� To ensure the proper progress and execution of the GOV project;

� To define the project plan for the operational validation of GNSS-1;

� To ensure communication with the stakeholders;

� To ensure that all information required for the progress of the project is available;

� To promote the general knowledge and understanding of the EGNOS system among theproject stakeholders;

� To support stakeholders in fulfilling their tasks in the various project activities.

3.2 Background

The GOV project is intended to support the introduction of EGNOS into operational use bycivil aviation in the ECAC region. This document serves as the GOV project plan, the devel-opment of which will require considerable stakeholder consultation, in particular with ESA, theEOIG States, the airlines and the Safety Regulation community. Discussions with ESA needto take place to be clear what is covered already in the EGNOS project validation activitiesand which elements will need to be addressed by EUROCONTROL and the EOIG. The processwill need to result in a clear definition of what needs to be done, how much will be done byESA and what the civil aviation community will need to undertake. A breakdown of responsi-bilities will then be made between the ECAC States (particularly the members of the EOIG),and EUROCONTROL. This process will also clarify the requirements for the planned dataevaluation and simulation tools.

3.3 WP 1.1: General Management

Scope

Activities

� Perform overall management and administration

� Perform project and schedule control

� Organisation of meetings

� Progress reporting

� Documentation control

� Budget Management

Duration: January 2000 – December 2005

Inputs

� Output of WP 1.2 (PMP)

Outputs

� Three Monthly Progress Reports for EATMP



� Yearly GOV progress reports

3.4 WP 1.2: Project Plan Development

Scope

In close co-operation with Member States intending to offer EGNOS navigation services,ESA and the applicable units and programmes in EUROCONTROL, in particular the NavigationProgramme:

� Define the scope of the work of GOV

� Define the GOV project plan

Duration: July 1999 – April 2001

Inputs

� Reports detailing the results of preparatory studies of NLR [GPV,99] and AZB [EOTV,99];

� Results of the EOTV Workshop [EOTVW,99];

� WAAS-related plans [NAS,**] and [W_ORE,**];

Outputs

� A detailed work plan for all activities necessary for the execution of the GNSS-1 opera-tional validation.

3.5 WP 1.3: Stakeholder Co-ordination

Scope

� Co-ordination with the States, in particular those of the EOIG, through GOV andPSG/NSG meetings

� Co-ordination with ESA through the ETG and EGNOS PTT/BLA meetings

� GNSS Panel participation


Inputs

� -

Outputs

� GOV meeting agendas and minutes

3.6 WP 1.4: Information Gathering

Scope

� Co-ordination with the FAA through the SOIT




Inputs

� -

Outputs

� Mission reports

3.7 WP 1.5: Education and Publicity

Scope

� GOV website development

� Organisation of Workshops

� Conference attendance


Inputs

� -

Outputs

� GOV Website

� Workshop reports

� Conference papers

3.8 WP 1.6: Stakeholder Support

Scope

� Support to stakeholders wishing to participate in GOV activities

� Support to non-EOIG states wishing to offer EGNOS services


Inputs

� -

Outputs

� -



4 WP 2: EGNOS OPERATIONAL CONCEPT

Workpackage leader: EUROCONTROL Navigation Programme

4.1 Objectives

� To define an operational concept for the use of GNSS-1 by Civil Aviation in Europe;

� To follow and support the activities of the EATMP Navigation Programme to ensure thatall issues related to GNSS-1 are taken into account;

4.2 Background

The Airspace management and Navigation Team (ANT) has developed a Navigation Strategyfor ECAC [NAVSt,99] describing the operations to be supported by Navigation services theevolution of the navigation infrastructure. The operations are illustrated in a “roadmap forStrategic Actions” in the Navigation Domain shown in Figure 5. The anticipated rationalisationof the ECAC Navigation Infrastructure up until 2015 is illustrated in Figure 6. The TransitionPlan for the Implementation of the Navigation Strategy is discussed in [TPINS,00], which isan important background document for the GOV work as it describes the operations and therequirements for navigation services in ECAC.

The baseline for the work in the Navigation Programme is the Navigation Strategy for ECAC,which provides a roadmap showing the navigation applications to be supported in ECAC overthe time period up to 2015 and a prediction of the anticipated rationalisation of the navigationinfrastructure during that period. EGNOS is expected to meet the navigation requirements forall operational procedures from en-route down to Category 1 precision approach.

The activities in the Navigation Programme are spread over six work-packages:

Short Term Applications of RNAV in Terminal Airspace

The goal of this work package of is to support the implementation of RNAV procedures in theshort term, particularly in the TMA. This will involve the development of guidance material onRNAV and procedures design and will include charting and database requirements. The GOVwork aims to ensure that EGNOS is considered as a navigation system that can be used tosupport the RNAV procedures and to develop, in conjunction with the Navigation Programme,guidance material and procedures specifically related to EGNOS operations.

Medium Term Applications of RNAV in Terminal Airspace

To gain significant benefits from the application of RNAV in Terminal airspace a series ofautomated tools for arrival and departure management will be required. The objective of thiswork package is to demonstrate that significant benefits can be achieved by the implementa-tion of RNAV in the TMA. This will involve the development of controller tools, standards andprocedures. The navigation sensor onboard the aircraft does not form a significant part ofthis work package although flight deck procedures will be involved. The improved navigationcapabilities provided by EGNOS will not be fully realised if this work package is not success-fully completed but there is little input required from the GOV activity.

Long Term Application of 4D RNAV

The objective of this work package is to evaluate the potential benefits of 4D RNAV and de-fine operational requirements in the context of an integrated ATM environment. The role ofGOV in this work package will be to assess whether of not the use of EGNOS allows the de-



fined operational requirements to be met. This work package has not yet been started so therequirements are not yet available.

RNAV Approaches with Vertical Guidance

The objectives of this work package are to facilitate the early implementation of approachprocedures with vertical guidance (APV) in ECAC States. Baro-VNAV and EGNOS are ex-pected to support such RNAV approach procedures.

Approach procedures in Europe are designed in accordance with rules published in ICAOPANS-OPS Doc. 8168. This document is maintained by the Obstacle Clearance Panel. Thecurrent document includes design criteria for RNAV approaches using VOR/DME, DME/DME,or GPS. Design criteria for Baro-VNAV are currently under development. Design criteria forSBAS in support of APV approaches are under discussion but material needs to be broughtto the OCP on this topic.

DepartureDeparture

En-routeEn-route

Airport Airport (A-SMGCS)(A-SMGCS)

Approach Approach and Landingand Landing

2010

20102005

20052000

2000 2015

2015

Conventional SIDs

RNAV SIDsRNAV mandatoryin selected TMAs(RNP tbd)

BRNAV at all levels

Free Routes(BRNAV)

RNP 1 RNAVroutes

ExtendedFree Routes

RNP 1 RNAVmandatory en-route

4D RNAV

Rationalisation of the Ground Infrastructure for all phases of flight

Provide runway guidance

Provide Cat I/II/III PA

Conventional STARs

RNAV STARs

Provide NPA

RNAV mandatoryin selected TMAs(RNP tbd)

RNAV mandatoryin all TMAs(RNP tbd)

RNAV mandatoryin all TMAs(RNP tbd)

Figure 5 Roadmap for Strategic Actions in the Navigation Domain

2000

2000

2010

2010 2015

2015

2005

2005

En-Route

VO R

DM E

ND B

G BAS

G PS

SBAS

Approach /Landing /Departure /A-SM GCS

ILS Cat II/IIIMLS Cat III

DM EVO RNDB

ILS Cat IG PS

SBAS C at IG BAS C at I/II/III C at I

Figure 6 The anticipated rationalisation of the ECAC Navigation Infrastructure



The GOV contribution to this work package will be an investigation into the use of EGNOS tosupport approach procedures with vertical guidance. Material will be developed for the ICAOOCP showing how obstacle clearance criteria can be developed for the use of EGNOS tosupport APV approaches. This material will need to be supported by measured data on theperformance of SBAS systems to be provided as an output of work packages 3 and 4.

RNAV for Landing

The goal of this work package is to assess the navigation capabilities of GNSS to supportprecision approach operations. The main portion of this work will be addressed by the GBASproject of the GNSS Programme.

Navigation Requirements for A-SMGCS

The objective of this work package is to derive navigation performance requirements for air-port surface operations as part of Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control Sys-tems (A-SMGCS). Once defined the role of EGNOS could be assessed, but until such timewill remain outside the GOV scope.

4.3 WP 2.1: Concept Definition

Scope

� Perform a documentation review including the RTCA Do-229B MOPS for SBAS and as-sociated TSOs, FAA AC 120-29A and the JAA TGL 10

� Develop educational material for the EGNOS community on the necessary steps to betaken to bring EGNOS into operational service. This document will consider in particular‘SBAS-based VNAV’ related issues, and the potential impact on standards concerningvisual aids, and Annex 14 protection surfaces.

� Use education material to organise a Workshop, for operators, regulators and EGNOSexperts.

� Develop a document describing the proposed concept of operations for EGNOS. Thismaterial shall be aimed towards people from the regulatory and operational community.

� Develop a document describing the implications on RNAV provision and operations ofusing EGNOS as a navigation date source –. This work package will consider, inter alia,whether the MOPS/TSOs meet the TGL-10 requirements.

� Identify the tasks required to allow the use of EGNOS to support approach procedureswith vertical guidance and prepare proposals for modifications to the required ICAOdocumentation. This will result in a working paper for the ICAO OCP that could be pre-sented to the September 2001 meeting of OCP.

Duration: February 2001 – December 2001

Inputs

� R

Outputs

� A



4.4 WP 2.2: EGNOS Navigation Applications

Scope

This work package makes direct reference to the first six work packages of the NavigationProgramme. These define the navigation requirements for the various applications describedin the ECAC Navigation Strategy. Since GNSS is a potential source of position informationfor each of the applications listed, the successful operational implementation relies on itsconsideration in each of the Navigation programme work packages. The GOV responsibilityin this area is to keep the Navigation programme informed of the status of EGNOS develop-ments, its capabilities and how it can be applied to support the various RNAV applications.The GOV participants also keep track of the work in the Navigation Programme to ensurethat GNSS issues are fully considered.

For each of the navigation applications described the following elements will be defined:

� Navigation performance requirements

� Operational requirements

� Safety requirements

� Implementation guidance material

� Procedures development

� Cost benefit studies

GOV Activities

� Develop design criteria for SBAS approaches being co-ordinated through the TARAgroup of the NSG;

� Develop SBAS approach procedures to selected airports

� Support EGNOS NOTAM development

� Support specification and development of ATC interface

� Study the impact of the EGNOS introduction on air traffic control


Inputs

� R

Outputs

� A



5 WP 3: AIRBORNE COMPONENTS

Workpackage leader: EUROCONTROL Navigation Programme

5.1 Objectives

� To support the maintenance of receiver standards (RTCA MOPS);

� To support the development and validation of functional and operational requirements forthe airborne components of GNSS-1;

� To support working groups facilitating the introduction of RNAV being a pre-requisite forthe benefits to be obtained from GNSS-1;

� Develop material describing issues related to the integration of GNSS-1 into the aircraft.

5.2 Background

5.3 WP 3.1: Receiver Standard

Scope

� Support maintenance process of RTCA MOPS Do-229 [DO229A,98]


Inputs

� R

Outputs

� A

5.4 WP 3.2: Functional and Operational Requirements

Scope

� Support development of JAA guidance material

� Support States to issue Advisory Circulars

Duration: January 20** – December 20**

Inputs

� R

Outputs



� A

5.5 WP 3.3: RNAV Issues

Scope

Avionics

Both the navigation infrastructure and the airborne systems support the achieved navigationperformance. The actual track keeping performance of many existing aircraft is not preciselyknown. As well as assessing the airborne requirements for new systems the Navigation Pro-gramme will analyse the performance achieved using existing systems.

The Navigation Programme will also perform a study on display requirements and humanfactors in the cockpit. This will include the use of simulations and flight trials. Guidance mate-rial will be developed on flight deck procedures.

Data Base

Initial studies have indicated that the data integrity currently provided by AIP and airbornedatabases is not sufficient to support advanced RNAV operations. The Navigation Pro-gramme has started work on the evaluation of the relevant standards and how their applica-tion can be improved to support the requirements.

GOV activities

� Follow and support where necessary this work.

Duration: February 20** – December 20**

Inputs

� R

Outputs

� A

5.6 WP 3.4: Aircraft Integration

Scope

� Study implications of integrating EGNOS into the aircraft.

Duration: February 20** – December 20**

Inputs

� R

Outputs

� A



6 WP 4: EARLY TRIALS


6.1 Objectives

� Develop tools for the execution of early trials activities;

� Perform data collection and evaluation using the EGNOS System Testbed (ESTB);

� Perform simulations to perform an initial validation of data collected and

6.2 Background

A series of early trials is planned in order to gain experience with the use of GNSS in civilaviation operations, to feed inputs into the future activities, and to give feedback to theGNSS-1 system developer. These early trials will include initial simulation activities, flight pro-cedure development and measurements in various locations throughout Europe using ESTBsignals. This process will contribute to the development and validation of the necessary stan-dards and provide input to the definition of the detailed project plan.

The objective of this workpackage is to perform an Early Trials programme to gain experi-ence with the EGNOS System Test Bed (ESTB) and to evaluate operational procedures.These trials will support the development of the project plan and will serve as a learning toolfor all Stakeholders involved in EGNOS implementation.

6.3 WP 4.1: Prototype Tools Development

Scope

� Development of an early prototype data collection, storage and processing tool calledPEGASUS to support the development of the ASQF and SAPPHIRE Phase III. The toolwill be distributed for evaluation to the GOV Working Group members.

� Develop a prototype flight test tool

Duration: January 2000 – June 2001

Inputs

� R

Outputs

� A

6.4 WP 4.2 Data collection and evaluation

Scope

The ESTB will allow prototype operational procedures and validation procedures to be inves-tigated. In order to perform trials receiving equipment will need to be identified, early datacollection and processing tools must be developed and experimental flight procedures andflight test plans made.

This work package covers the following activities:



� Development of a common test plan for civil aviation test-bed activities

� Initial data collection activities using the ESTB

� Initial flight tests and demonstrations


Inputs

� ESTB results

� WAAS-related documents.

Outputs

� Early data collection and evaluation tools;

� Reports detailing the results of early data collection and evaluation campaigns.

6.5 WP 4.3 Simulation

Scope

It is clear that measurements will not be possible in all areas of the EGNOS service area sosimulation tools will be needed to extrapolate to other areas. Extreme conditions can also betested in a simulation environment that will not be found in real life.

To evaluate the operational use and potential benefits of EGNOS a simulation platform will bedeveloped at the CEV in Istres in the south of France to evaluate experimental RNAV/VNAVprocedures using EGNOS.

The following activities are planned for the first half of 2000:

� Simulation tool development

� Initial simulations

Depending on the results of the initial simulations further work may be pursued in this area.

Use of simulation facilities under development in EGNOS project for:

� Develop better understanding of EGNOS performance sensitivity


Inputs

For flight simulation:

� Nice approach procedure

� EGNOS error data

� Appropriate flight simulator

For EGNOS system simulation:



� EGNOS simulation tools

Outputs

� An early total system simulation platform;

� Report detailing the results of early simulation campaigns.

6.6 WP 4.4: Comparison of measured and simulated data

Scope

The results of the data collection and simulation campaigns should be assessed with respectto each other for validation of both simulation and data collection and evaluation tools.

Duration: July 1999 – December 2000

Inputs

� R

Outputs

� A



7 WP 5: SIGNAL-IN-SPACE ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION


7.1 Objective

This workpackage has the following objectives:

� To support and perform the maintenance of the SBAS Signal-in-Space standards andmission requirements documents

� To review to EGNOS verification plans to build GOV activities on top of this;

� To identify discrepancies between the SIS specification from Civil Aviation (i.e. ICAOSARPS and OCR/DP/157) and the SIS specification laid down in the EGNOS SRD.

� To develop tools for data collection and evaluation both static and in-flight;

� To evaluate whether the GNSS-1 Signal-in-Space meets the requirements in the stan-dards documents applicable to Civil Aviation by performing data collection and evaluationand comparing the results with those obtained using simulations

� To plan and carry out a flight trials programme to validate the SIS performance in the op-erational environment of an aircraft;

� To analyse the integrity concept for EGNOS and validate that EGNOS is providing theintegrity as required by SARPS and MRD;

� To investigate anomalies found during various validation activities.

7.2 Background

ESA has developed the EGNOS Verification Plan (EVP) including planned SIS evaluation ac-tivities. The work in GOV must begin where that of ESA ends and therefore, the first stepshould be to understand, as far as possible, the scope of ESA’s work. This will help to betterdefine the GOV “delta” in relation to the verification activities of ESA.

It is likely that additional EGNOS SIS assessment activities need to be carried out withinGOV for the following reasons:

� The current ESA work baseline does not assume the complete ICAO GNSS-SARPs asan applicable document for the assessment of the EGNOS SIS. Its work will be limited tothe validation in relation to the EGNOS System Requirements Document (SRD).

� ESA’s work on EGNOS SIS verification is mainly based on static trials: Although someflight trials (around 70 hours) are being programmed, these will not be exhaustive. As aconsequence, the GOV work will need to complement ESA’s work by including the nec-essary additional flight-testing.

The verification of the EGNOS-SIS to be carried out within GOV must cover all of the con-cepts addressed in the GNSS-SARPs and the EGNOS Mission Requirements Document(MRD).

7.3 WP 5.1: SIS Standard

Scope

� To support and perform the maintenance of the SBAS Signal-in-Space standards andmission requirements documents




Inputs

� R

Outputs

� A

7.4 WP 5.2: Review and understanding of ESA’s work

Scope

ESA is planning to carry out SIS evaluation activities that are described in the so-calledEGNOS Verification Plan (EVP). The GOV activities should build on the ESA work and com-plete the operational validation for civil aviation ensuring that effort is not duplicated and thatall necessary assessment activities are carried out, either by ESA or within GOV. Thereforeit is important to review and understand the work defined in the EVP. This will help to betterdefine the GOV “delta” with respect to the work of ESA. The review should serve to identifymissing points in the EVP in order to specify the work necessary to complete the validationagainst the MRD and SARPs.

A continuous liaison needs to be established with ESA in order have a view of all SIS verifi-cation activities and be made aware of any changes. Critical points encountered during theimplementation of the EGNOS EVP can then be analysed in detail by GOV. If necessarydedicated impact studies could be performed to investigate specific issues raised.


Inputs

� EGNOS Verification Plan (EVP)

� EGNOS CDR documentation in general

Outputs

� A description of the boundaries of ESA work and the remaining actions to be taken withinGOV.

� Knowledge to support other WPs

7.5 WP 5.3: Mission Requirements vs. Total System Design

Scope

The first tasks in this work-package relate to the SARPs [SARPs,00] and the civil aviation mis-sion requirements document [DP157,00]. The applicable requirements for the EGNOS SISperformance for Civil Aviation are those stated in [DP157,00]. This document is compatiblewith the SARPs. However, where the SARPs allow a range of values for continuity-of-serviceand availability DP157 provides specific values. Therefore the extent to which the SIS com-plies with the MRD and the SARPs needs to be determined. Figure 7 shows how the EGNOSSignal-in-Space in combination with various receiver types is able to support the various op-erations that are expect with the use of EGNOS.

ESA will validate against the Service Level 3 described in the SRD. For example, they willvalidate service level 3a for the combination of GPS and EGNOS against the CAT-1 accuracy



and integrity requirements and will determine the level of availability and continuity for CAT-1.However, this service level is also expected to support other operations such as en-routenavigation where the requirements are different (in principle less stringent). It will thereforebe necessary to assess the use of the service level 3 service for other operations than CAT-1. It is not clear whether or not this work will be done by ESA. The need for this work willtherefore be identified as an output from WP 3.1

This task will also involve an assessment of the EGNOS-SIS structure, in terms of messageformats, power levels, modulation, etc. It is crucial to investigate whether the signal structureis in accordance with the SARPs, since SARPs compliance is a key factor to allow world-widecompatibility and interoperability with other SBASs.

ESA is expected to carry out verification activities related to this issue. However, the SARPs[SARPs,00] and the MOPS [DO229A,98] have evolved considerably since the initiation of theproject and it is considered that a careful check should be performed to ensure that all therelevant requirements have been taken into account for EGNOS. Although both documentsare similar, and should be equivalent, some differences may exist. Therefore, a task to iden-tify potential discrepancies (if any) between SARPs and the standards applied to EGNOS isincluded here.

GOV Activities

� Task 1: SIS performance compliance matrix

� Task 2: SIS structure/format compliance matrix

� Task 3: Analysis of the identified discrepancies

Duration: June 2000 – October 2001

Inputs

� ICAO SARPS

� MRD

� EGNOS Compliance Matrices

� RTCA MOPS

Outputs

� A document containing the following:

1. The identification of any discrepancies between the EGNOS-SIS (Structure and Per-formance) and the set of requirements included in the MRD and SARPs.

2. An assessment of the criticality of such discrepancies (if any) and their impact on theoperations, in terms of practical usability, safety risks, and compatibility andinteroperability with other SBAS and approved user equipment.



Phase of flight SBAS servicesEquipment

classOceanic,domestic,en-route

Terminal NPA DeparturePrecisionapproach Ranging Integrity

Basic dif-ferential

corrections

Precise dif-ferential

corrections

RequiredEGNOS

service level

1 X X X X X 32 X X X X X X X 33 X X X X X X X X X 34 X X X X X 3

≥ 8 GPS≥ 6 GPS & 2 GEO


Receiverminimum

tracking ca-pability


q Service level 3 is the only one that ismeaningful from an operational point ofview

q Two base cases for SRD to MRD per-formance translation:

1. Ranging + Integrity + Basic Corrections

2. Ranging + Integrity + Basic Corrections +Precise Corrections

Figure 7 Cross-checking between receiver classes, minimum required tracking capability, phase of flight and required SBAS services [GOV-DP05].



7.6 WP 5.4: Tools Development

Scope

Tools development for:

� Data collection

� Data analysis

� Flight test tools

Duration: July 20** – December 20**

Inputs

� R

Outputs

� A

7.7 WP 5.5: Data collection and Evaluation

Scope

In accordance to the GNSS-SARPs, the performance of the EGNOS SIS must be evaluatedin terms of accuracy, integrity, continuity-of-service and availability. In addition the SIS serv-ice area needs to be considered. This is left open in the SARPs but it is included in the MRDas one of the basic requirements driving the system design.

For performance evaluation, it is important to remark that:

� The performance of the EGNOS SIS is determined by the GPS, GLONASS and SBASfunctions of EGNOS;

� Worst cases must be included. SIS assessment cannot be limited to “normal” condi-tions;

� There is a link between this task and the EGNOS Safety Case: SIS integrity and conti-nuity of service performance are two basic safety parameters of the SIS;

� With respect to the user receiver, only the minimum performances stated in the TSOscan be assumed. This may reduce practical performance below the maximum potentialobtained with the best user equipment;

� ESA will verify the SIS performance against the SRD;� Only the static trials in the EVP are applicable to industry. Flight trials will be useful but

will be performed only with a limited scope.

An exhaustive assessment of the SIS performance under static conditions will be carried outby ESA. What must be considered in this project is the difference between the static and air-borne environments. The differences between the static and airborne environments can becharacterised by a number of factors as listed in Table 2.

Activities

Develop test-plan in 2001/2002This would include:



� The development of a static test programme (if considered necessary by WP 3.1) com-plementing and if necessary supplementing the ESA verification campaign.

� The development of a preliminary list of factors causing performance degradation on-board. Table 2 can serve as a starting point.

� The preliminary evaluation of the criticality of the identified degradation factors. Existingtools such as SAPPHIRE, the simulation facility in C.E.V. Istres, ESTB, ESSF and na-tional infrastructures can be used. For instance, the existing SAPPHIRE database can beused to compare onboard DOP degradation with DOP in static conditions.

� Elaboration of a methodology to assess the degradation factors. This would include thedevelopment of standard methods (e.g. a statistical method to compute accuracy) to as-sess the different issues.

� Design of specific flight test to assess the different points.

� Analysis of existing tools and infrastructures and, if required, specification of new ones.

EUROCONTROL does not have test aircraft and will rely heavily on aircraft belonging to itsMember States. This Test Plan should be agreed between all States involved in GOV and putin practice in a co-ordinated manner.

Development of necessary tools and procurement of equipment for data collection andevaluation

In the EGNOS Project various tools are under development that will support the operationalvalidation of EGNOS. In particular the Application Specific Qualification Facility (ASQF) isbeing developed to support the operational validation of the GNSS-1 Signal-in-Space. In ad-dition to these tools additional data evaluation tools may need to be developed, such as:

� SAPPHIRE Phase III

� User platform under the ECUREV programme of the EC

Perform a static data collection campaign

� Based on ESTB activities

� Extent to be determined based on studies of ESA verification material

Perform pre-operational flight trials in 2003

# Factors (hazards) Possible effect(s)

1 Pseudorange accuracy is degraded due tolocal multi-path or fading caused by the air-frame.

q Accuracy degradation Õ

Integrity failure.

2 Loss of GEO ranging due to manoeuvres andlocal reception problems.


Continuity and availabilityfailures.

3 Geometry (DOP) degradation due to airframemasking or antenna attitude change duringmanoeuvres.


Continuity and availabilityfailures.

4 Loss of EGNOS augmentation messages dueto manoeuvres and local reception problems.

q XPLs increase Õ Continu-ity and availability failures.

5 Interference. q ?

6 Others? q ?

Table 2: Preliminary list of factors causing onboard performance degradation.



� Participate in ESA flight trials programme

� Perform complementary trials

Perform operational flight trials in 2004

� Perform operational trials as found appropriate in the test plan

Duration: January 2001 – October 2004

Inputs

Flight test plan

Outputs

� Data evaluation tools

� A report showing the level of compliance of the Signal-in-Space with the requirementsbased on the results of flight and static tests.

7.8 WP 5.6: Simulation

Scope

� Demonstration/validation of EGNOS operational use

� Extrapolation of measurement results


Inputs

� R

Outputs

� A

7.9 WP 5.7: Comparison of measured and simulated data

Scope

� Validation of data collection/analysis and simulation tools.

Duration: 20** – December 20**

Inputs

� R

Outputs

� A



7.10 WP 5.8: Integrity Validation

Scope

TBD by scoping study ‘SBAS Integrity Concept’

Duration: 20** – December 20**

Inputs

� R

Outputs

� A

7.11 WP 5.9: Anomaly Investigation

Scope

Deal with implementation problems found during validation phase.


Inputs

� R

Outputs

� A

gnss plan4b

Documents

eatmpgnsssbaspmp edition

edition date reason

operational validationedition

draft all0

draftgnss programmegnss

programmegnssdocument

present document

management authorities