A I R T R A F F I C O R G A N I Z A T I O N Future Communications Study Technology Assessment Team:...
-
Upload
ella-mcgregor -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
0
Transcript of A I R T R A F F I C O R G A N I Z A T I O N Future Communications Study Technology Assessment Team:...
A I R T R A F F I C O R G A N I Z A T I O N
Future Communications Study Technology Assessment Team: Outcome of Phase II Activities
Presented at ICAO ACP WGC Meeting, Brussels, Belgium
September 19, 2006
Prepared by:ITT/Glen Dyer, Tricia Gilbert
NASA/James Budinger
2
Background
• FCS Technology Investigation is being performed in three phases– Phase I: Technology Pre-Screening May – December 2004
• Recommended applicable satellite and terrestrial technologies (in VHF, L- and C-Band)
– Phase II: Technology screening and detailed evaluation of selected technologies that scored well in the Phase 1
• This briefing presents an overview of the results from this phase
– Phase III: Detailed Technology Investigations
3
Elements of the Candidate Technology Evaluation
InputCandidate
Technologies
Captured from ACP and other sources
Meets Needs?
Costs/Impacts
Technology Maturity
Safety
Evaluation Criteria
•Commercial•Prototypes•Standards •ITU – Spectrum
•ICAO/RTCA•FAA
•Avionics•Service Provider
Rec. for C-Band
Rec. for Sat
Rec. for L-Band
Recommended forDetailed Evaluations
Stake Holder Needs•Compatibility•Affordability •Availability
Consensus Documentation
IdentifiedNeeds
CO
CR
ICA
O
Detailed Evaluations
Technology Screening
InputCandidate
Technologies
Captured from ACP and other sources
Meets Needs?
Costs/Impacts
Technology Maturity
Safety
Evaluation Criteria
•Commercial•Prototypes•Standards •ITU – Spectrum
•ICAO/RTCA•FAA
•Avionics•Service Provider
Rec. for C-Band
Rec. for Sat
Rec. for L-Band
Rec. for C-Band
Rec. for Sat
Rec. for L-Band
Recommended forDetailed Evaluations
Stake Holder Needs•Compatibility•Affordability •Availability
Consensus Documentation
IdentifiedNeeds
CO
CR
ICA
O
Detailed Evaluations
Technology Screening
4
Evaluation Methodology – Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP)
ICAOACP
ICAOACP
FCS Phase ITechnologyInventory
FCS Phase ITechnologyInventory
1. Augment Technology Inventory (List Alternatives)
1. Augment Technology Inventory (List Alternatives)
2. Define Screening Filter(Define Threshold Level)
2. Define Screening Filter(Define Threshold Level)
3. Screen Technologies(Determine Acceptable Alternatives)
3. Screen Technologies(Determine Acceptable Alternatives)
5. Develop Decision Hierarchy5. Develop Decision Hierarchy
Phase II Task Activity
Phase III Task Activity
Key:
4. Derive AHP Evaluation Criteria(Define Criteria)
4. Derive AHP Evaluation Criteria(Define Criteria)
6. Evaluate Technologies vs. AHP Criteria6. Evaluate Technologies vs. AHP Criteria 7. Comparison of AHP Criteria Pairwise7. Comparison of AHP Criteria Pairwise
8. Calculate Evaluation Scores(Calculate Overall Priorities for Alternatives)
8. Calculate Evaluation Scores(Calculate Overall Priorities for Alternatives)
9. Sensitivity Analysis9. Sensitivity Analysis
3a. Update/Create Technology
Concepts of Use
3a. Update/Create Technology
Concepts of Use
TechnologyScreening
Detailed EvaluationsPhase II & III Task Activity
ICAOACP
ICAOACP
FCS Phase ITechnologyInventory
FCS Phase ITechnologyInventory
1. Augment Technology Inventory (List Alternatives)
1. Augment Technology Inventory (List Alternatives)
2. Define Screening Filter(Define Threshold Level)
2. Define Screening Filter(Define Threshold Level)
3. Screen Technologies(Determine Acceptable Alternatives)
3. Screen Technologies(Determine Acceptable Alternatives)
5. Develop Decision Hierarchy5. Develop Decision Hierarchy
Phase II Task Activity
Phase III Task Activity
Key:
4. Derive AHP Evaluation Criteria(Define Criteria)
4. Derive AHP Evaluation Criteria(Define Criteria)
6. Evaluate Technologies vs. AHP Criteria6. Evaluate Technologies vs. AHP Criteria 7. Comparison of AHP Criteria Pairwise7. Comparison of AHP Criteria Pairwise
8. Calculate Evaluation Scores(Calculate Overall Priorities for Alternatives)
8. Calculate Evaluation Scores(Calculate Overall Priorities for Alternatives)
9. Sensitivity Analysis9. Sensitivity Analysis
3a. Update/Create Technology
Concepts of Use
3a. Update/Create Technology
Concepts of Use
TechnologyScreening
Detailed EvaluationsPhase II & III Task Activity
5
Updated Technology InventoryTechnology Family Candidates
Cellular Telephony Derivatives
TDMA (IS-136), CDMA (IS-95A), CDMAone (IS-95B), CDMA2000 1xRTT, W-CDMA (US)/UMTS FDD (Europe), TD-CDMA (US)/UMTS TDD (Europe), CDMA2000 3x, CDMA2000 1xEV, GSM/GPRS/EDGE, TD-SCDMA, DECT
IEEE 802 Wireless Derivatives
IEEE 802.11, IEEE 802.15, IEEE 802.16, IEEE 802.20, ETSI HIPERPAN, ETSI HIPERLAN, ETSI HIPERMAN
Public Safety and Specialized Mobile Radio
APCO P25 Phase 1, APCO P25 Phase 2, TETRA Release 1, TETRAPOL, IDRA, IDEN, EDACS, APCO P34, TETRA Release 2 (TAPS), TETRA Release 2 (TEDS), Project MESA
Satellite and Other Over Horizon Communication
SDLS, Connexion by Boeing, Aero B-GAN, Iridium, GlobalStar, Thuraya, Integrated Global Surveillance and Guidance System (IGSAGS), HF Data Link, Custom Satellite System, Digital Audio Broadcast
Custom Narrowband VHF Solutions
VDL Mode 2, VDL Mode 3, VDL Mode 3 w/SAIC, VDL Mode E, VDL Mode 4, E-TDMA
Custom Broadband ADL, Flash-OFDM, UAT, Mode-S, B-VHF (MC-CDMA), LDL, L-Band E TDMA
Military Link 16, SINCGARS, EPLRS, HAVEQUICK, JTRS
Other APC Phone (Airphone, AirCell, SkyWay)Note: A bold font has used to indicate the new additions to the technology inventory.
6
Technology Screening Overview
• The technology screening used key metrics to identify the most promising candidates from each technology family– The key metrics for terrestrial technologies that were selected and used
are data rate and communications range
– For the satellite and over-the-horizon family of technologies, the screening criteria was a gate (ability to use protected spectrum) and the technology data rate
– Each technology family was assessed and plotted on a “tri color” chart, with acceptable, marginal and good regions inferred from COCR requirements
– Most promising technologies from each family were selected for detailed evaluation (depending on family performance, 0, 1 or many were selected)
• Next two slides provide screening results in a graphical format. The third slide provides a summary of the technology screening results.
7
Technology Screening Summary – Terrestrial Technologies
All Technologies Range and Data Rate
APCO P34
TETRAPOL
VDL Mode 2
VDL Mode E
B-VHF (in L-Band)L-Band E-TDMA
LDLLINK-16HAVEQUICK
REF
COCR Phase 1
ATS OnlyCOCR Phase 1
ATS & AOC
COCR Phase 2
ATS & AOC
TMA
ER LD
ER HD
APT
UMTS WCDMA
TD-CDMA
CDMA2000 1xEVDO
GSM/GPRS/EDGETD-SCDMA
DECT
CDMA2000 3x
IEEE 802.16eIEEE 802.20
IEEE 802.15IEEE 802.11a,b,g
APCO P25
TETRA Release 1
IDRAiDEN
EDACS
Tetra Release 2-TAPSTetra Release 2-TEDS
VDL Mode 3 (Mode 3T)
VDL Mode 4E-TDMA
ADL
UAT
Flash-OFDM
SINCGARS
COCR Phase 2
ATS Only
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
Data Rate Provided (kbps)
Co
mm
un
ica
tion
s R
an
ge
Pro
vid
ed
(N
MI) Candidates to
bring forward
All Technologies Range and Data Rate
APCO P34
TETRAPOL
VDL Mode 2
VDL Mode E
B-VHF (in L-Band)L-Band E-TDMA
LDLLINK-16HAVEQUICK
REF
COCR Phase 1
ATS OnlyCOCR Phase 1
ATS & AOC
COCR Phase 2
ATS & AOC
TMA
ER LD
ER HD
APT
UMTS WCDMA
TD-CDMA
CDMA2000 1xEVDO
GSM/GPRS/EDGETD-SCDMA
DECT
CDMA2000 3x
IEEE 802.16eIEEE 802.20
IEEE 802.15IEEE 802.11a,b,g
APCO P25
TETRA Release 1
IDRAiDEN
EDACS
Tetra Release 2-TAPSTetra Release 2-TEDS
VDL Mode 3 (Mode 3T)
VDL Mode 4E-TDMA
ADL
UAT
Flash-OFDM
SINCGARS
COCR Phase 2
ATS Only
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
Data Rate Provided (kbps)
Co
mm
un
ica
tion
s R
an
ge
Pro
vid
ed
(N
MI) Candidates to
bring forward
Legend
Small Squares = Cellular Technologies
Small Diamonds = IEEE 802 Technologies
Small Triangles = Public Safety Radio
Small Circle = Custom VHF
Large Square = Custom Broadband
Dashmark = Military
8
Technology Screening Summary – Satellite Technologies
Satellite & OTH Technologies Comparison by Data Rate
Inm
arsa
t SB
B w
ith Q
oS L
ow E
nd
IGS
AG
S
SD
LS G
loba
l Bea
m
Thu
raya
Glo
bals
tar
Irid
ium
Inm
arsa
t SB
B w
ith Q
oS H
igh
End
COCR Phase 1ATS Only
COCR Phase 2ATS Only
COCR Phase 2ATS & AOC
HF
Dat
a Li
nk
Cus
tom
Sat
Sol
utio
n (e
.g. S
DLS
Spo
t Bea
m)
COCR Phase 1ATS & AOC
0.0
1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
Data Rate Provided (per user) (kbps)
Candidates to bring forward
9
NASA/ITT Screened Technologies
Screened Technologies
Continental Solution
W-CDMA
P34
E-TDMA
LDL
B-VHF
Link 16
Inmarsat
Custom Satellite System (e.g. SDLS)
Oceanic Domain
Inmarsat
Custom Satellite System (e.g. SDLS)
Airport Domain IEEE 802.16e
• Nine total technologies are brought forward from the Screening process
– Eight are candidates that provide a general solution applicable to continental airspace (including en route, TMA and airport)
– These candidates are considered further as part of a full technology investigation
– Some technologies can be considered in the context of specific domains
• Oceanic: Inmarsat, Custom Satellite (also counted as potential continental solutions)
• Airport: IEEE 802.16e (not considered applicable as a continental solution)
10
EUROCONTROL Screening Short List
• Eurocontrol presented their current technology short list at the ICAO ACP WG-C10 meeting (March 17, 2006)
Technology Short List
Evolution of existing aeronautical systems or concepts
• (x) DL3• E-TDMA• (x) DL4
New terrestrial systems
• B-VHF• 3G systems (WCDMA)• P34
Satellite Systems • Inmarsat SwiftBroadband• New satellite system(s)
Airport/surface systems
• 802 derivatives .11x, .16 and .20• Airport Data Link
11
Comparison of Screened Technologies
•INMARSAT Swift Broadband•Custom Satellite•Link 16
• [(x)DL4]
• ADL
Continental
Oceanic
Airport
Continental
Oceanic
Airport
• P-34• Broadband-VHF• Wideband CDMA• Enhanced TDMA• L-band Datalink
[(x)DL3]
• INMARSAT Swift Broadband
• Custom Satellite
• IEEE 802.16
• P-34• Broadband-VHF• Wideband CDMA• Enhanced TDMA• L-band Datalink
[(x)DL3]
• INMARSAT Swift Broadband
• Custom Satellite
• IEEE 802.xx
Common RecommendationsNASA – ITT Eurocontrol
12
Initial Detailed Technology Evaluation Scores
Technology Evaluation - Overall Averaged Score
P34B-VHF
WCDMA Cus. Sat. E-TDMA LDL INMARSAT
LINK-16
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
• Initial implementation of the Analytical Hierarchy Process (Detailed Evaluation Process) identifies two leading candidates, P34 and B-VHF
– Additional candidates that scored well include W-CDMA, E-TDMA, and LDL
– Inmarsat and emerging satellite technologies that utilize AMS(R)S spectrum score well and are recommended for remote airspace
– 802.16e is recommended for use on the airport surface
• Phase II in-depth technology investigations that support the Detailed Evaluations have considered P34, LDL, 802.16e and satellites; further study of the following technologies is recommended for Phase III
– WCDMA– B-VHF– L-Band E-TDMA
• Initial implementation of the Analytical Hierarchy Process (Detailed Evaluation Process) identifies two leading candidates, P34 and B-VHF
– Additional candidates that scored well include W-CDMA, E-TDMA, and LDL
– Inmarsat and emerging satellite technologies that utilize AMS(R)S spectrum score well and are recommended for remote airspace
– 802.16e is recommended for use on the airport surface
• Phase II in-depth technology investigations that support the Detailed Evaluations have considered P34, LDL, 802.16e and satellites; further study of the following technologies is recommended for Phase III
– WCDMA– B-VHF– L-Band E-TDMA
13
Action Request
• The ACP Working Group is invited to consider the technology investigation activities described in this paper; including the methodology employed, the screened technology results and the preliminary detailed evaluation results, and to provide comments if desired