INCLUDEPICTURE

"http://www.icao.int/anb/panels/acp/Program Files/Default

Company Name/ICAOMainMenuSetup/Icons/icao

logo.jpg" \* MERGEFORMATI

NET

International Civil Aviation Organization

REPORT

21st-30th March 2012

AERONAUTICAL COMMUNICATIONS PANEL (ACP)

TWENTY SIXTH MEETING OF WORKING GROUP F

Montreal, 21st - 30 March 2012

REPORT

1. Introduction

1.1 The meeting was opened by Mr. Eric Allaix, the Rapporteur of Working Group F. Before beginning the discussion, the Rapporteur addressed, on behalf of all WGF members, many thanks to Steve Mitchell his predecessor since 1998.The rapporteur highlighted to the group that the main purpose of the meeting was to form a draft ICAO Position for WRC-15 and the update and development of the ICAO Frequency Spectrum Handbook. Mr Loftur Jonasson from the ICAO Secretariat, Montreal was the Secretary of the meeting.

1.2 After the opening of the meeting the agenda was approved by the group. The agenda is contained in Appendix A.

1.3 The Secretary informed the group that the Air Navigation Commission (ANC) recently reviewed the work programme of the ACP. The outcome of this review confirmed the current work programme of the ACP WG-F without modification. The ANC also reviewed the Annex 10 Volume III and V SARPs updates addressed by ACP WGW and ACP WG-F in September and October 2011. The updates passed with flying colours and will be sent out for State Review

shortly, and then receive a final review by the Commission and Council in the Autumn/Winter sessions of this year. As the updates to Volume V rely on the material in the new draft Part II to the RF Handbook, Part II now needs to be finalized and delivered by the group by the end of the next meeting, in the autumn of this year. Other deliverables required this year are the ICAO Position as well as updates to the Policy Statements as contained in Chapter 7 of the RF Handbook. When considering these updates, a potential inclusion of strategic objective statements for each of the aeronautical frequency bands should also be considered.

1.4 The list of working papers and information papers submitted for consideration by Working Group F is contained in Appendix B. The list of participants is in Appendix C.2. Agenda Item 2 – Outcome of WRC-12

2.1 IP01 was presented by the Secretary. In general the conference results conformed to the position. It was pointed out that the early awareness and involvement of Contracting States in the development and promotion of the ICAO Position permit to obtain positive results for the civil aviation community.

3. Agenda Item 3 – Development of ICAO position for WRC-15

3.1 7 WPs were presented on this agenda item (WP05, WP06, WP08 and App., WP10, WP11, WP12 and WP13). The results of the discussion can be found in Appendix D of this report. It has to be noted that this document will need to be reviewed and completed at the next WGF meeting in order for a timely review by the Air Navigation Commission before submitting it to States for their comments. This will allow for the position to be finalized and approved by Council by mid 2013.

3.2 Specific issues

3.2.1 WP13 pointed out the fact that under WRC-15 AI 1.7, Resolution 114 asks for studies in relation with new ARNS system in the 5091-5150 MHz frequency band. The discussions concluded that no new ARNS system is foreseen to be developed in that frequency band by ICAO. It was agreed that the NSP SSG will, in particular for AI 1.7, review the draft ICAO position, and will inform WGF in case there are any new ARNS developments foreseen in this band.

3.2.2 WP08 proposed to develop an ICAO position on the alignment of ITU MIFR with ICAO databases since it could be reported on at the next WRC as part of the chairman’s report. It was indicated that the outputs of WRC-12 on this issue were that the Bureau first should urge administrations, through a Circular Letter, to notify aeronautical frequency assignments to the MIFR, second expressed the opinion that consultations should continue between ITU-R and ICAO with respect to a possible transfer of ICAO database information to the Bureau. WGF members decided that there is no need to develop an ICAO position on this issue, however a new agenda item will be initiated for the next WGF meetings to inform WGF’s members on the progress of the discussions between ITU-R and ICAO on this issue.

4. Agenda Item 4 – Review, update and development of the ICAO FrequencySpectrum Handbook

Under this agenda item the ACP Working Group F reviewed Part I and Part II the Frequency Spectrum Handbook.

4.1 Proposals for Part I

4.1.1 WP03, in addition to update Part I, provided proposals on strategic objectives for each frequency band mentioned. The idea to include the strategic objectives in the handbook was very appreciated by WGF members, and it was agreed to keep this information.

4.1.2 WP04 and its attachment provided updated information in particular to take into account the output of WRC-12. WP14 proposed modification to Chapter 8 of the handbook to take into account the future spectrum requirements. WGF decided to merge WP03, WP04 and WP14 in order to allow WGF members to make comments on the same document for the next WGF meeting. Further development of the material in the merged document will be progressed until the next meeting of WGF (WGF#27) by the email correspondence group created during WGF#24 in Paris and chaired by Mr. Robert Witzen (r.witzen@videotron.ca). WGF participants were encouraged to support this work. The document used as the baseline for consideration by the correspondence group can be found in Appendix E of this report.

4.1.3 It has to be noted that as the updated handbook needs to be finalized by the end of 2012, the next WGF meeting will be the last opportunity to make any modifications.

4.2 Proposals for Part II

4.2.1 WP02 and WP15 were presented. The material contained in WP02 was already presented to the last WGF meeting in Dakar. WP15 proposed a new presentation of Chapter 1 of this Part II. The meeting agreed to go in the way proposed in WP15. The email correspondence group, chaired by Mr Robert Witzen, will handle the task to review the document in that way for the next WGF meeting. The document that will be used as the baseline for consideration by the correspondence group can be found in Appendix F of this report.

4.2.2 It was also proposed to have the same approach for the others chapters of this Part II. As the deadline to approve this Part II is also the end of 2012, the meeting agreed to work on this issue for the future revision of the handbook (after 2015).

5. Agenda Item 5 – Structure of the ITU-R

5.1 Mr. Nikolai Vassiliev presented IP10 containing the output of the first CPM held in February 2012. It was pointed out that Chapter 3 of the draft CPM report will deal with the main issues for aeronautical Agenda Items.

5.2 One major item of information was the establishment during the CPM of the Joint Task Group JTG 4-5-6-7 as the responsible group for the WRC-15 for Agenda Item 1.1 and 1.2. Agenda Item 1.1 is important for civil aviation interests in particular due to the terms of reference of this JTG which stipulate that its work will be conducted as a self-sufficient group without need to liaise the results of its studies to the other ITU-R working parties. The WGF members expressed the need for ICAO secretariat to attend the future meetings of the JTG as it will be the only forum to defend aviation interests.

6. Agenda Item 6 – Development of material for ITU-R meetings

6.1 WP09 and 4 IPs (IP03, IP04, IP05 and IP06) were presented. All these documents are related to WRC-12 Resolutions 222 and 422 (ex-COM4/1) and the involvement of ICAO in this issue.

6.2 It was pointed out that the procedure called by Resolution 222 will only be applicable once the methodology to determine the spectrum requirement has been approved by ITU-R. This gives some time to organize work in ICAO as the approval of the methodology is not foreseen before mid-2013.

6.3 Invites 2 of Res. 222 indicates that ICAO will evaluate and comment, as appropriate, on the AMS(R)S traffic requirements received from individual administrations, on the basis of the known global and regional aviation traffic requirements, including the time-scale of regional and global communication requirements. After some discussions it was agreed by the meeting that a document, providing the information required by ICAO in order to be able to evaluate and comment on an analysis of the AMS(R)S traffic requirements as presented by an AMS(R)S operator, will be defined. The added value provided by ICAO will be based on the existing situation of each satellite system (for instance, historical traffic statistics as provided by the operator) and the evolution of aviation traffic based on forecasts. ICAO would not be in a position to take into account specific situations such as the overlap coverage of different satellite systems or technical design of satellite network. For newcomer AMS(R)S providers, traffic statistics in the satellite coverage area will be taken into account by ICAO to evaluate or comment on the traffic requirements received.

6.4 A group by correspondence has been established in order to prepare eventual ICAO input to WP4C, in particular for the elaboration of the methodology called by Res 422. Mr. Suzuki kindly accepted to lead this group by correspondence. WGF members who are willing to participate to this group are requested to send an email to Mr. Suzuki (suzuki@jransa.or.jp).

6.5 With regards with IP06 which presents the output of the last WP4C on the development of the methodology, it was pointed out that some material such as Appendices A and E of Attachment 1 of the methodology give interesting information but it is not necessary to keep this information in the methodology itself. WGF members didn’t see any problem to suppress this information in the methodology.

7. Agenda Item 7 - Development of material for regional telecommunication organization meetings

7.1 No material was developed during this WGF meeting under this agenda item.

8. Agenda Item 8 - Interference from non-aeronautical sources

8.1 IP10 provided the draft CEPT report on compatibility between primary radars operating in the frequency band 2.7-2.9 GHz and the mobile service operating below 2.69 GHz. This report will become the reference in term of compatibility between radar and mobile systems operating in adjacent band but will also certainly be a good help for the future discussion in the framework of WRC-15.Concerning the interference into the radar, it was mentioned that this also relates to the out of band rejection ability of the radar. A filter has been defined and will be implemented in the next 2 to 3 years in the different countries, if the initial tests give satisfactory results, and depending on the capacity of the radar’s manufacturers to deploy the filter in the different countries.

9. Agenda Item 9 – Any other business

9.1 Briefing on UAS Study Group activities

9.1.1 Ms. Leslie Cary, Secretary of the UAS Study Group (UASSG) provided a short briefing on the work underway by that body, particularly related to communications and terminology recently adopted by the Council of ICAO. Communications underlies all aspects of remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) operations; the technical requirements of which are currently being identified in order to allow SARPs and guidance material to be developed. Among the terms now used in ICAO Standards are command and control (C2), command, control and ATC communications (C3), detect and avoid, remotely piloted aircraft (RPA), remote pilot station (RPS) and remotely piloted aircraft system.

9.1.2 WGF participants were invited to work with the UASSG to identify communications and frequency spectrum requirements. It was noted that the UASSG would next meet at ICAO HQ from 23 to 27 April.

9.2 Assessment of Technologies for UAS Line-of-Sight - Control and Non-Payload Communications

9.2.1 WP07 presents an update of the progress on the assessment of candidate technologies for the prototype radios for unmanned aircraft system line-of-sight control and non-payload communications. A large number of technologies were studied but it appears that due to constraints in particular in the areas of mobility, security, and quality of service no existing technology can be implemented without further modifications. WGF took note of the progress made on this topic.

9.3 L-Band and C-Band Air-Ground Channel Measurement Campaign

9.3.1 IP08 provides details of the air-ground channel measurement and modelling campaign which will be done during 2012 in the L-Band and C-Band for the development of Control and Non-Payload Communications for unmanned aircraft systems. WGF noted the paper and will appreciate a presentation of the result of this measurements campaign at a future WGF meeting.

9.4 VHF communications system in Japan

9.4.1 IP02 provided, in addition to information provided during the previous WGF meeting, a detailed technical requirement information on the plan to introduce 8.33 kHz channel spacing for VHF communications in Japan planned for AOC and domestic usage only. It was announced during the presentation that some tests measurements will be realized in 2012. WGF noted the information provided and will appreciate further updates once the results of measurements become available.

9.5 AeroMACS

9.5.1 During the WGS meeting, discussion was raised regarding the frequency range that the future SARPs for AeroMACS will specify.It has to be noted that at WRC-12 no new allocation to AM(R)S was made in the 5000-5030 MHz frequency band in addition to the existing allocation in the 5030-5091 MHz frequency band. Two opposite views were presented:

- if the SARPs for AeroMACS were to mirror the RTCA and EUROCAE standards and quote a frequency range of 5000-5150 MHz then the SARPs would not be aligned with the Radio Regulations, and

- in at least one State allocations in the national frequency tables will permit such use, in order to have interoperability for aircraft flying into that state, the development of SARPs to cover the frequency range 5000-5150 MHz is needed.

9.5.2 After some clarification and discussion between WGF members, two potential options were developed for further consideration:

- Option 1 : No mention of the frequency range in the SARPs and in the manual. The SARPs will stipulate that deployment of AeroMACS will have to be made in frequency band allocated to AM(R)S. In the manual a reference to the RTCA and EUROCAE standards will be précised

- Option 2 : The indication in the SARPs that the 5091-5150 MHz frequency band is the main frequency band for deployment of AeroMACS. An additional recommendation will stipulate that AeroMACS can also be deployed in the band 5000-5091 MHz in the countries where an AM(R)S allocation exists. This option, if selected, will have to be expressed in a manner that clearly does not conflict with the Radio Regulations.

9.5.3 It was mentioned that WGS schedule is to fix the draft SARPs for AeroMACS at the end of 2012. It is then necessary for WGF to conclude on this issue at its next meeting. Contributions are waiting for the next WGF meeting to permit to conclude on this issue.

9.6 Proposal for the development of a UAS band plan

9.6.1 WP18 proposes that ICAO develops a plan as to how unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) are to be implemented in the frequency band 5 030-5 091 MHz to avoid short term expedience blocking long term efficiency. WGF agreed that this is something that needs to be initiated and it was concluded to create a new agenda item on this issue at its next meeting.

9.7 Impact of aircraft radio equipage on support costs

9.7.1 IP09 provides information on work being carried out on understanding the impact radio equipage has on support costs of an aircraft. An investigation, in co-operation, with the aircraft manufacturers and IATA, is on-going to try to identify the magnitude of the weight and costs saving that could be achieved if it were possible to reduce the amount of radio equipment fitted on-board an aircraft.

9.7.2 The meeting recognized that this is a highly relevant issue and it was agreed to continue this investigation for the next meeting, in particular by taking into account the regional impact, the added value that can provide WGF in the spectrum domain, and to explore which other forum could be interested by this item. The meeting expressed its appreciation for the information provided in this information paper.

9.7.3 The meeting agreed that if this subject could be matured sufficiently by the next WGF meeting, then such an output might potentially be considered by a State/States as an input paper to the 12th Air Navigation Conference.

9.8 Tools for frequency assignments

9.8.1 Robert Witzen presented the latest version of his frequency assignment tool. A finalized version is foreseen by the end of April 2012 and will be then presented to ICAO Bangkok Regional office.

9.9 Date of next meeting

9.9.1 At the kind invitation of IATA, the next meeting will be held from the 17th to the 26th September 2012 at IATA Headquarters, Montreal.

APPENDIX A

INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION

26TH Meeting of the Aeronautical Communication Panel Working Group F (ACP WG-F/26)

(Montreal, 21 – 30 March 2012)

Final Agenda

1. Opening and working arrangements

2. Outcome of WRC-12

General IP01

Future agenda items

3. Development of ICAO position for WRC-15 WP05, WP06, WP08 and App., WP10, WP11, WP12

4. Review, update and development of the ICAO Frequency Spectrum Handbook

WP04 and Att., WP14, WP17

Update of ICAO Policy statements (Strategy) WP03

Further development of new Part II, Frequency Assignment Planning

WP02, WP15

5. Structure of the ITU-R IP10

6. Development of material for ITU-R meetings WP09, IP03, IP04, IP05, IP067. Development of material for regional telecommunication organization meetings8. Interference from non-aeronautical sources IP07

9. Any Other Business WP07, WP18, IP02, IP08, IP09

-------------------

APPENDIX B

List of Papers

List of Working Papers

Working Paper

Source Title Agenda Item

WP1 Rapporteur Agenda 1WP2 Secretary Handbook on radio frequency spectrum

requirements for civil aviation; Part II Frequency assignment planning criteria for aeronautical communication and navigation systems

4

WP3 Secretary Development of ICAO Strategic Objectives and update of ICAO Policy Statements

4

WP4 John Mettrop Provisional draft updates to the ICAO Frequency Spectrum Handbook, Doc 9718

4

WP5 John Mettrop Operation of Unmanned Aircraft Systems Under The Fixed Satellite Service Allocation

3

WP6 Joe Cramer Consideration of regulatory actions, including allocations, to support Wireless Avionics Intra-Communications

3

WP7 Robert Kerczewski Assessment of Technologies for UAS Line-of-Sight Control and Non-Payload Communications

9

WP8 John Mettrop Proposal for the draft ICAO position for WRC-15 + Appendix

3

WP9 Yoshio Suzuki Final Report of the Correspondence Group Dealing with WRC-12 Agenda Item 1.7

6

WP10 John Taylor WRC-15 AI 1.1Additional Spectrum for Mobile Service and IMT

3

WP11 John Taylor WRC-15 AI 1.5Use of frequency bands allocated to FSS to support UAS CNPC Links

3

WP12 John Taylor WRC-15 AI 1.7Review of the band 5091-5150 MHz under Resolution 114 (WRC-12)

3

WP13 John Taylor WRC-15 AI 1.17Wireless Avionics Intra-Communications

3

WP14 Joe Cramer Provisional draft update of Chapter 8 of the ICAO Frequency Spectrum Handbook, Doc 9718

4

WP15 John Mettrop Proposal for Volume II of the Handbook 4WP16 John Mettrop Use of frequency bands allocated to the fixed

Satellite Service to support Unmanned Aircraft System Command and Non-Payload Communication Links

3

WP17 John Mettrop Proposal for a Policy Statement on Spectrum 4

UsageWP18 John Mettrop Proposal for the Development of a UAS Band

Plan9

List of Information Papers

Information Paper

Source Title Agenda Item

IP1 Secretary Report on the results of the ITU World Radiocommunication Conference 2012 (WRC-12)

2

IP2 Teruaki Nagasawa

The air-ground VHF communication system of Japan (Rev1)

9

IP3 Yoshio SUZUKI

Attachment F to WG-F/25 Report: Guidelines for member states towards WRC-12 Agenda Item 1.7

6

IP4 Yoshio SUZUKI

Resolution 222 (Rev. WRC-12): Use of the frequency bands 1 525-1 559 MHz and 1 626.5-1 660.5 MHz by the mobile-satellite service, and procedures to ensure long-term spectrum access for the aeronautical mobile-satellite (R) service

6

IP5 Yoshio SUZUKI

Resolution [COM4/1]: Development of methodology to calculate aeronautical mobile-satellite (R) service spectrum requirements within the frequency bands 1 545-1 555 MHz (space-to-Earth) and 1 646.5-1 656.5 MHz (Earth-to-space)

6

IP6 Yoshio SUZUKI

Annex 6 to Doc.4C/660: Working documents towards a preliminary draft new Report ITU-R M.[AMS(R)S.METHODOLOGY], General principles, guidelines and example methodology(ies) to calculate spectrum requirements to satisfy AMS(R)S access

6

IP7 Eric Allaix Radar/Mobile issue in the S band 8IP8 Robert

KerczewskiL-Band and C-Band Air-Ground Channel Measurement Campaign

9

IP9 John Mettrop Impact of Aircraft Radio Equipage on Support Costs

9

IP10 Nikolai Vassiliev

Results of the first session of the Conference Preparatory Meeting for WRC 15 (CPM15 1)

5

APPENDIX CAeronautical Communications Panel (ACP/WG-F/26)

Montréal, Canada, 21/03/2012 to 30/03/2012Attendance List

Name: State/Organization Email addressEddy D'Amico Australia Eddy.damico@AirservicesAustralia.com Geandro Luiz De Mattos

Brazil dcte3@decea.gov.br

Waldir G. Nunes Brazil waldir.nunes@hotmail.comJohn Taylor Canada john.taylor@tc.gc.caJean-Claude Brien Canada Jean-Claude.Brien@ic.gc.caEric Allaix France eric.allaix@aviation-civile.gouv.fr Felix Butsch Germany felix.butsch@dfs.deDamodharan Narayanan India dnarayanan@aai.aeroP.K. Kapoor India pkkapoor@aai.aeroKoki Inoue Japan inoue-k48yf@mlit.go.jpYoshio Suzuki Japan suzuki@jransa.or.jpTeruaki Nagasawa Japan t.nagasawa@soumu.go.jpChie Fukushima Japan chie.fukushima@mofa.go.jpMiura Ryu Japan ryu@nict.go.jpGerlof Osinga Netherlands gerlof.osinga@agentschaptelecom.nl Charlemagne P. Gilo Philippines xrm_010760@ymail.comLuciano R. Macuse Philippines xrm_010760@ymail.comTurki M.A. Yosef Saudi Arabia tayosef@gaca.gov.saKhalid D. Al-Hazmi Saudi Arabia kalhazmi@gaca.gov.saRobert Witzen Sweden r.witzen@videotron.caJohn Mettrop United Kingdom john.mettrop@caa.co.ukSteven Mitchell United Kingdom steve.mitchell@nats.co.ukDavid J. Reed United States David.Reed@pentagon.af.milMichael Biggs United States michael.biggs@faa.govBob Kerczewksi United States rkerczewski@nasa.govJonathan Williams United States jwilliams@ntia.doc.govAngelo Ruggeri United States ajruggeri@rockwellcollins.comDon Jansky United States don@jansky-barmat.comDavid Choi United States dchoi@mitre.orgChris Hutchison United States keh@asri.aeroSven Fraenkel EUROCONTROL sven.fraenkel@eurocontrol.int Marcella S. Ost ICCAIA (BOEING) marcella.s.ost@boeing.com Luis Fernando de Souza ICCAIA (EMBRAER) lfsouza@embraer.com.br Uwe Schwark ICCAIA (AIRBUS) uwe.schwark@airbus.com Audrey Allison ICCAIA (BOEING) audrey.allison@boeing.com Joseph Cramer ICCAIA (BOEING) joseph.cramer@boeing.com Claude Pichavant ICCAIA (AIRBUS) claude.pichavant@airbus.com Nikolai Vassiliev ITU nikolai.vassiliev@itu.int Barbara D'Amato IATA damatob@iata.org Maurice Labonde ICAO mlabonde@icao.int Loftur Jonasson ICAO ljonasson@icao.int

APPENDIX D

APPENDIX E

APPENDIX F