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: Suggested Phase III Activities

Presented at ICAO ACP WGC Meeting, Brussels, Belgium

September 19, 2006

Prepared by:ITT/Glen Dyer, Tricia Gilbert

NASA/James Budinger

2

Background

• Phase III of the Future Communications Study (FCS) technology investigation has recently commenced– Focus of Phase III is detailed investigation of two additional

technologies initially screened in Phase I and II activities to evaluate applicability for the future radio system

• Phase III builds upon knowledge gained in first two study phases– General technology knowledge (e.g. technology concepts of use

for aviation application)– Evaluation criteria knowledge (derived and traceable evaluation

metrics)– Detailed technology investigation knowledge

3

Phase III Detailed Technology Evaluation Activities

• Three major task areas have been identified

1. Screened Technology Analyses (with focus on technologies not yet investigated)

• Candidate technologies for additional detailed investigations include W-CDMA, B-VHF and L-Band E-TDMA

• Common Model/Tool Development

2. DME and Mode S Interference Measurements

3. Final Technology Evaluation and Recommendations

4

Task Area 1: Screened Technology Analyses

• Objective– Detailed analysis of the suitability of Phase II

recommended technologies as FRS solutions• Initial technology study focus is WCDMA• Other candidates: B-VHF or E-TDMA

– These are the best performing technologies that have not yet been analyzed in detail

– The goal of this activity is to determine each of these technologies as fitting into one of the following categories as a FRS solution

• A totally suitable existing technology for the FRS• A custom solution for the FRS to meet aviation needs• A hybrid technology solution

5

Task Area 1: Screened Technology Detailed Analyses

Technology Standards

Technology Studies

FCS Phase I & II Technology Studies

Step 1Develop Detailed Analysis Plan

Define Objective(s) Specify Approach Develop Schedule

Step 2Perform Detailed Analysis

Analyze Functional Requirements

Analyze Institutional Requirements

Analyze Performance Requirements

Refine Concept of Use

Analyze Technology

Technology Standards

Technology Studies

FCS Phase I & II Technology Studies

Step 1Develop Detailed Analysis Plan

Define Objective(s) Specify Approach Develop Schedule

Step 2Perform Detailed Analysis

Analyze Functional Requirements

Analyze Institutional Requirements

Analyze Performance Requirements

Refine Concept of Use

Analyze Technology

6

Task Area 1: Common Model/Tool Development Overview

• Approach identified in original FCS documentation calls for “simulation of screened technologies”, for example:– Define common environmental models/loading scenarios for

evaluating technologies

– Build representative models for candidate technologies

– Evaluate technology performance

• Must ensure developed tools/models for Phase III analysis address the range of evaluation criteria proposed for technology selection, including– Technical criteria – addressing required functionality and

performance of the future radio system

– Institutional criteria – addressing factors of a technology that make it a viable candidate solution (e.g. cost/risk factors)

7

Task Area 1: Example Evaluation Tools/Models

Evaluation Criteria Technology Detailed Analyses Analyses Tools/Models

Functional Criteria Functional Capability - ATC and AOC A/G and A/A Addressed Data and G-A Broadcast Data Capability

Functional flow diagrams, sequence diagrams, swim lines

Rational Rose; CORE; any appropriate diagramming tool

Communication Performance – Latency, QoS, Capacity, Number of Users

Protocol Simulation

Physical Layer Simulation

Common Traffic Model;

Common Channel Model

Institutional Criteria Maturity for Aeronautical Environment - Technical Readiness Level

Not required Assessment by Inspection

Maturity for Aeronautical Environment - Standardization Status

Not required Assessment by Inspection

Maturity for Aeronautical Environment - Certification Issues

Detailed assessment of safety aspects of system

Tools to diagram and capture fault tree analysis

Cost – Ground Cost Cost Analysis Cost Model Methodology;

Cost Model Assumptions

Cost –Avionics Cost Cost Analysis Cost Model Methodology;

Cost Model Assumptions

Spectrum Protection Not required Assessment by Inspection

Security Vulnerability Assessment Security Assessment Methodology

Transition – ROI, technical migration (including integrity and availability performance), and operational migration

Availability Analysis Common Architectural Assumptions

8

Task Area 1: Tool Development Objectives and Approach

• Objective– Develop consensus on

required tools/models for future radio system technology evaluation

– Tool/model development

• Approach– Participate in consensus

meetings to identify tools/models required for technology evaluation

– Determine format for tools/models

– Support tool/model development and validation

Security Assessment MethodologyVulnerability AssessmentSecurity

Cost Model Methodology;

Cost Model Assumptions

Cost AnalysisCost – Ground Cost

Assessment by InspectionNot requiredMaturity for Aeronautical Environment -Technical Readiness Level

Institutional Criteria

Assessment by InspectionNot requiredMaturity for Aeronautical Environment -Standardization Status

Tools to diagram and capture fault tree analysis

Detailed assessment of safety aspects of system

Maturity for Aeronautical Environment -Certification Issues

Common Architectural Assumptions

Availability AnalysisTransition – ROI, technical migration (including integrity and availability performance), and operational migration

Assessment by InspectionNot requiredSpectrum Protection

Cost Model Methodology;

Cost Model Assumptions

Cost AnalysisCost –Avionics Cost

Common Traffic Model;

Common Channel Model

Protocol Simulation

Physical Layer Simulation

Communication Performance – Latency, QoS, Capacity, Number of Users

Rational Rose; CORE; any appropriate diagramming tool

Functional flow diagrams, sequence diagrams, swim lines

Functional Capability - ATC and AOC A/G and A/A Addressed Data and G-A Broadcast Data Capability

Functional Criteria

Analyses Tools/ModelsTechnology Detailed AnalysesEvaluation Criteria

Security Assessment MethodologyVulnerability AssessmentSecurity

Cost Model Methodology;

Cost Model Assumptions

Cost AnalysisCost – Ground Cost

Assessment by InspectionNot requiredMaturity for Aeronautical Environment -Technical Readiness Level

Institutional Criteria

Assessment by InspectionNot requiredMaturity for Aeronautical Environment -Standardization Status

Tools to diagram and capture fault tree analysis

Detailed assessment of safety aspects of system

Maturity for Aeronautical Environment -Certification Issues

Common Architectural Assumptions

Availability AnalysisTransition – ROI, technical migration (including integrity and availability performance), and operational migration

Assessment by InspectionNot requiredSpectrum Protection

Cost Model Methodology;

Cost Model Assumptions

Cost AnalysisCost –Avionics Cost

Common Traffic Model;

Common Channel Model

Protocol Simulation

Physical Layer Simulation

Communication Performance – Latency, QoS, Capacity, Number of Users

Rational Rose; CORE; any appropriate diagramming tool

Functional flow diagrams, sequence diagrams, swim lines

Functional Capability - ATC and AOC A/G and A/A Addressed Data and G-A Broadcast Data Capability

Functional Criteria

Analyses Tools/ModelsTechnology Detailed AnalysesEvaluation Criteria

9

Task Area 2: DME and Mode S Interference Measurements

• Objective– Further characterization of

DME and Mode S equipment interference performance against proposed modulation types for the FCS; particularly susceptibilities from the following types of equipment

• CDMA• MCM• Narrowband Digital

• Approach– This activity will consist of the

six interrelated tasks shown in the figure

1. Develop Test Plan & Procedures

2. Specify Interference

Sources to Evaluate

3. Procure or develop equipment

to emulate interference sources

4. Conduct Bench Tests Against DME

& Mode-S Receivers

5. Analyze and Reduce Data

6. Report Results

Interference Measurements

Current Activities

1. Develop Test Plan & Procedures

2. Specify Interference

Sources to Evaluate

3. Procure or develop equipment

to emulate interference sources

4. Conduct Bench Tests Against DME

& Mode-S Receivers

5. Analyze and Reduce Data

6. Report Results

Interference Measurements

Current Activities

10

Task Area 3: Final Technology Evaluation and Recommendations

• Objectives– Solicit, collect, and assess a wide

range of stakeholder inputs and feedback

– Perform the final technology evaluation and develop appropriate recommendations

• Approach– Combine technology performance

assessment against derived criteria with synthesis of a wide range of stakeholder input/feedback to fully reflect stakeholder requirements

• Facilitated through a more extensive application of the defined Analytical Hierarchy Process

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

TechnologyConcepts of Use

3a. Update/Create

TechnologyConcepts of Use

TechnologyScreening

Detailed Evaluations

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

TechnologyConcepts of Use

3a. Update/Create

TechnologyConcepts of Use

TechnologyScreening

Detailed Evaluations

11

Action Request

• The ACP Working Group is invited to consider the technology investigation activities described in this paper, and provide comments if desired

• It is recommended that the ACP Working Group discuss and agree upon the desired outcome of the Future Communications study

• It is recommended that the ACP Working Group discuss and agree upon the need for a comprehensive modeling approach against all evaluation criteria and specify model structures for each