CNS_ATM-AG_5_Minutes__Final by pengtt

VIEWS: 21 PAGES: 60

									                                International Business Aviation Council (IBAC)




           Communication Navigation Surveillance/Air Traffic Management
                                  (CNS/ATM)
                                         Advisory Group (AG)
                                              FIFTH MEETING

                                  (Wichita, Kansas, USA, 13 - 14 April 2010)


1    Introduction

    1.1     The Fifth Meeting of the International Business Aviation Council (IBAC) Communications
    Navigation Surveillance/Air Traffic Management Advisory Group (CNS/ATM AG5) was convened
    with the principal objective of continuing the work of the Group. The meeting was held in Wichita,
    Kansas, USA, 13-14 April 2010 and included a tour of the Cessna facility.

    1.2     The CNS/ATM AG 5 focused on the following items:

                        a. reports from ATMG 35 and the CNSG 02;

                        b. discussion on the IBAC CNS/ATM AG Equipage and                  the Technology
                           Development Roadmap;

                        c. updates on the web based sites for the CNS/ATM AG;

                        d. discussion on the Datalink mandates;

                        e. status of items in the CNS/ATM AG 4 action list.

    1.3      Peter Ingleton chaired the meeting and opened with his welcome remarks stating how pleased
    he was to acknowledge the varied participation at this meeting.

    1.4     Ingleton acknowledged Mr Bill Boucher (the past Chairman of the CNS/ATM AG), who has
    moved to a new job and will no longer be assisting the group. The group wished him well in his new
    endeavours.

    1.5     Ingleton also thanked Mr Jake Biggs and the Cessna Textron Company for hosting the meeting
    in Wichita. He thanked Jake for his assistance in arranging meeting logistics for the CNS/ATM AG5
    meeting and facilitating the tour of the Cessna Mid Continent Campus.

    1.6      Ingleton also noted the assistance of the Cessna staff for their help in setting up the meeting
    room for the group as well as providing all refreshments and lunches.

    1.7      Brian Bowers was the Secretary for the meeting. He expressed the regrets on behalf of several
    participants (FAA-ATO & SWIM, NAV CANADA, JBAA, Universal Avionics, Home Depot-Flt Ops,
    and EBAA) who were unable to attend the meeting.

    1.8     The lists of participants and of contacts are at Appendix A.


                                                                                            April 2010
  1.9        The Group then adopted the following agenda items:

        a) Reports – CNSG, SOG and ATMG;

        b) Discussion on meetings, input and participation

        c) CNS/ATM AG Technology Development Roadmap;

        d) CNS/ATM on the web;

        e) CNS/ATM – News and Views;

        f) CNS/ATM Issues; ADS-C, CPDLC, ADS-B, ATN, SAAAR (Special Aircraft and Aircrew
           Authorization Required), Recorders

        g) Regional Issues

        h) Action Plan;

        i)   Differences between SESAR and NextGen

        j)   Any other business;

        k) Next meeting:

        l)   IBAC members‟ equipage; and

        m) Tour of Cessna Facility.

2. Agenda Review and Update

  2.1     During the review and agreement on the agenda items it was noted that one of the prime
  objectives of this meeting would be a discussion on the datalink mandates in the NAT and Europe.

  2.2     Another issue to be discussed was the Technology Development Roadmap and its current
  status.

3. Reports/Group Representation

  3.1      IBAC has a number of representatives who participate on IBAC‟s behalf at meetings within the
  international community.

  3.2    It had been agreed at previous meetings of the AG that the representatives at the CNSG, SOG,
  IMG and ATMG should provide information from the meetings to the group that concern CNS/ATM
  implementation.

  3.3     With this in mind, the secretary provided a brief summary of activity which had taken place
  during the ATMG/35 meeting held in Paris, France, 8 to 12 March 2010 noting areas relevant to the
  CNS/ATM AG.
3.4     The ATMG have been advised that a “user‟s conference” is tentatively planned for September
2010 in Reykjavik, Iceland.

3.5       David Stohr expanded on this item and noted the conference has been discussed for several
years. The economy of Iceland has seen a marked decrease recently and the IMG noted this would be a
suitable time from a „cost to host” basis to convene a user‟s conference.

3.6      It was noted at the IMG meeting by the IATA representative that since Iceland was not served
by the IATA member airlines that it was felt the cost of tickets for member representatives could be a
prohibitive factor.

3.7     The AG secretary stated that the conference is different from the previously held International
Oceanic Conferences (IOC) in that the “user‟s” conference is directed at the flight planners,
dispatchers, dispatch organizations, operators (large and small), pilots, and anyone flying the north
Atlantic or involved in the operations in that airspace. Previous user‟s conferences had involved
upwards of 500 attendees.

3.8      The ATMG had noted that the NAT Region data link mandates prime intention was to ensure
(to the extent possible) that aircraft will be fitted with the appropriate equipment to participate in NAT
Region data link services prior to the deadlines established in the EUR Region data link mandate,
thereby eliminating the need for double equipage.

3.9     A trial implementation of reduced longitudinal separation of 5 minutes between ADS-C
equipped aircraft is planned to commence on 25 May 2010. Initially, the application of the reduced
minimum will only be applied between suitably equipped eastbound aircraft in the Shanwick OCA east
of 30° west.

3.10     The proposal to amend the NAT SUPPs (DOC 7030) to require the insertion of the aircraft
registration in Item 18 of the ICAO flight plan form (FPL) has been approved.

3.11    IBAC has informed the ATMG/35 (via a Working Paper) of its concerns regarding the NAT
Data Link mandate arising from the fact that the majority of business aviation aircraft will not be able to
equip in time to meet the deadlines specified in the mandate due to the unavailability of FANS 1/A or
equivalent equipment.

3.12   It was noted by the ATMG that any data link implementation plan will need to balance the
needs of non-equipped airspace users against those of operators who had invested in the necessary
equipment, while also recognizing that, for some operators, the necessary equipment does not yet exist.

3.13    The ATMG expressed concerns that an IBAC proposal to grant waivers might delay equipage.

3.14     The ATMG did agree however that a concept of operations for accommodating non-equipped
aircraft should be developed and the United Kingdom has agreed to lead this activity. A draft concept
will be presented to NAT ATMG/36.

3.15    IBAC will provide information concerning business aircraft operations with regards to the
preferred altitude bands and routes.

3.16    IBAC has also requested that consideration be given to establishing criteria for expanding the
exclusionary airspace for the planned reduction of lateral separation to 25 NM. The criteria could, for
example, include determining the percentage of aircraft that should be equipped in order to proceed as
intended after 2013.

3.17     The ATMG has agreed with this request and it will be brought to the attention of the NAT
IMG.
3.18     The ATMG supported a proposal that terminology in use should distinguish between
“integrated” and “non-integrated” systems by referring instead to “installed” and “portable”
SATCOM voice systems, so as to clarify which systems are being discussed. The concept will be
further developed and presented to NAT ATMG/36.

3.19    It is not intended to initially designate airspace as segregated or exclusionary where ADS-B
services will be provided in the northern part of the NAT Region.

The ICAO EUR/NAT Secretariat has completed the task of migrating the content of the NAT PCO
website to the ICAO EUR/NAT website: www.paris.icao.int. Documentation pertinent to the NAT
Region can be accessed by following the links to “Documents” and then to “NAT Docs”.

3.20      A new type of document, the NAT Operations Bulletin (NAT Ops Bulletin), has been created
to facilitate the posting of “third party” documents such as AICs, guidance material for clearance
delivery via data link, etc. The NAT OPS Bulletin Checklist contains a list of all current NAT
Operations Bulletins and will be re-issued whenever a Bulletin is added or deleted.

3.21     The ATMG discussed the proposal to update NAT Doc 005 as presented to the ATMG/35 to
incorporate information on Required Navigation Performance (RNP) in the NAT Region. The material
is contained in Appendix B and it will be presented to the NAT IMG for their endorsement at their next
meeting.

3.22     David Stohr briefed the CNS/ATM AG on this item and reminded them that data link mandates
are not the only things planned for the NAT.

3.23    The CNSG 02 meeting review was also provided by the CNS/ATM AG Secretary.

3.24    The CNSG/2 was held from 22 to 26 March 2010 in Limerick, Ireland.

3.25    The CNSG felt that implementation of the new format of the ICAO flight plan (FPL2012)
will require a regionally coordinated effort in the NAT. It was also felt that the CNSG could act as a
focal point for the NAT work.

3.26     The United States had previously agreed to provide the NAT DLMA as an extension of the
existing and similar service currently being provided in the ICAO ASIA/PAC Region. The web site
developed by Airways New Zealand - ISPACG CRA (http://www.ispacg-cra.com) would provide
initial support to the NAT DLMA (Note: this web site was specifically designed to support
collection, distribution and tracking of problem reports, performance data, and other information).

3.27    The website has been modified to include reference to NAT DLMA in the problem reporting
area.

3.28    The IMG/35 felt that a separate NAT DLMA web site should be established in the future.
The CNSG/2 commented that if a separate NAT website solution in support of the NAT DLMA is to
be pursued then necessary measures would need to be undertaken to ensure uniformity of data to be
collected and disseminated. The efforts to establish such a website will need to be evaluated against
expected benefits.

3.29     There are still misunderstandings by flight crews of the intent of CPDLC message
elements containing the words AT and BY. The CNSG noted the ATMG and SG concerns that
this issue constituted a significant safety issue and required urgent resolution. The CNSG agreed that
issues associated with messages containing the words AT and BY might best be addressed by a
group composed of experts from both the CNSG and ATMG as most of the potential solutions have
both technical and operational implications. The CNSG agreed to recommend to the IMG that such
an ad-hoc group be formed.
3.30    The CNSG was provided with an update on the FANS 1/A over Iridium (FOI) project
underway by the FAA-sponsored PARC CWG. Initial statistical data samples gathered in the course
of the FOI data collection has provided promising results but further work is required.

3.31    There has been an increase in the FANS 1/A usage from 40% to 45% compared to the data
presented at the CNSG/1 meeting.

3.32     The CNSG/2 was presented with a working paper (WP10) by Canada urging clarification on
certain aspects of the NAT data link mandate.

3.33   One issue regarding the 2015 NAT data link mandate that stands out as crucial and
controversial, is: What does “aircraft unable to equip in the time frame” really mean?

3.34   Also the handling of aircraft equipped to meet the EUR mandate is particularly problematic.
The EUR Region 2015 mandate will not exclude those aircraft that have been equipped with FANS
1/A; how can the NAT exclude EUR Region CPDLC only aircraft?

3.35    The working paper also posed another question to be answered - “how will aircraft unable to
equip be accommodated?” for the 2013 initiative. The NAT SPG Conclusion 45/10 indicates the
entire OTS between FL 350 and FL 400 will require data link equipage in 2013. The CNSG
noted that this conclusion should be reconsidered to provide a partial OTS (i.e. optimal tracks
only) based on equipage, but not the entire OTS.

3.36   UK NATS have been working with Gulfstream and Honeywell, since September 2008, to
develop their Certification “F” software for CPDLC in the G450/G550 aircraft.

3.37 To date no operational issues have been seen with any of the notified flights utilizing
CPDLC. Approximately 30 crossings have been recorded.

3.38   The CNSG noted that further work was required on performance assessments to be carried
out against the GOLD requirements by the respective States of Registry or the Operator in the
framework of the operational authorization process.

3.39    The Global Operational Data Link Document (GOLD) has been produced with the aim to
replace the NAT Guidance Material for ATS Data Link Services.

3.40  The GOLD has been recommended to the NAT SPG/46 for adoption as the replacement for
the NAT Data Link Guidance Material.

3.41  In the initial period following its adoption, the ad-hoc group will continue to maintain the
document with the view to transferring this function to the ICAO Regional Offices at a later stage.

3.42    The GOLD among other things will be used to document system performance monitoring
and reporting requirements, provide formats for the data to ensure that global interchange is consistent,
and to standardize automated data collection within each individual ANSP‟s Flight Data Processing
System (FDPS) to create a consistent regional performance picture.

3.43    The most up to date version of the “GOLD” is available for review at:
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ato/service_units/enroute/oceanic/data_link/

3.44   Data from Information Paper 07 (IP07) of the CNSG/2 meeting is attached in Appendix C and
was presented to the group.
  3.45     This paper provides preliminary estimates of what it would cost some NAT operators to retrofit
  their aircraft with FANS 1/A to comply with the NAT data link mandate.

  3.46    It was recently circulated to the EFG Mandate Analysis Task Force as Version 2A.

  3.47    The paper generated a lot of discussion related to the NAT and European data link mandates.

  3.48    Members of the CNS/ATM AG were able collectively to clarify information within the group.

  3.49   One of the items of considerable discussion concerned the “request for exemption from the
  European data link mandate process”.

  3.50    It is clear that there will be many exemption requests but it is also becoming clear that they all
  will have to meet the European exemption criteria for exemption approval.

  3.51     The primary criteria (if unavailability of equipment is the basis for the request) will be the
  ability to convince the Regulatory body that the mandate is an extraordinary financial penalty for the
  manufacturer/operator requesting exemption.

  3.52   It was also noted that the IP07 costs do not include the new “flight recorder” requirements
  which are soon coming into effect.

  3.53     It was also noted by the CNS/ATM AG that support for modification of the implementation
  plan for the NAT datalink mandates and also modification of the associated separation reduction
  initiatives/timelines appears to exist in the ATMG and CNSG.

  3.54     The ATMG/35 and CNSG/2 technical reports are both attached as Appendix D and the reports
  are also be available on the IBAC and sharepoint CNS/ATM AG website locations.

4. CNS/ATM Advisory Group

  4.1     Considerable discussion took place in relation to RTCA SC214 discussions.

  4.2     SC214 is converging the ATN VDL mode 2 and FANS 1/A/ issues and is working on
  developing an acceptable solution to the benefit of everyone involved.

  4.3     The CNS/ATM AG noted the benefits of CPDLC including the safety enhancements but feels it
  should not be mandated at any expense.

  4.4     A copy of an FAA Datacomm presentation is posted on the IBAC and sharepoint websites
  (IBA C CNS/ATM Advisory Group / NBAA IBAC Sharepoint website).

  4.5     The presentation was not delivered in its entirety at the CNS/ATM AG/5 but its content was
  discussed at length by the group.

  4.6      The group discussed the way to proceed with the concerns regarding the NAT and European
  data link mandates.

  4.7     Some of the group felt that en-mass exemption requests to the European regulatory body would
  be the best way to advance the issues.

  4.8     Others felt that perhaps IBAC and GAMA should join together with a common front to try and
  modify timelines or requirements for the mandates.

  4.9   However the group after considerable discussion agreed that the business aviation community,
  IBAC, GAMA, and the EBAA have already done a good job of bringing the issues to the attention of
the appropriate organizations. It was agreed the CNS/ATM AG should wait to see what decisions may
be modified as a result of the interventions particularly in regard to the forward fit of business jets
deadline.

4.10    The next meeting of the AG is planned for Cologne, Germany in November and it was agreed
the AG should address at that meeting any outstanding issues with EASA and Eurocontrol as well as
reviewing the status of the data link mandates.

4.11    The AG discussed the composition of the group‟s current and future membership as well as
possible future participants and presenters

4.12    In order to accomplish the tasks set forth for the group it is necessary to have participants within
the group from all facets of the business aviation community.

4.13    The AG has representatives of OEMs, aircraft manufacturers, service providers, aviation
associations, and training representatives.

4.14    More representation from each part of the CNS/ATM global aviation community would be a
great asset and representatives, who can contribute to or learn from the group, are welcome to attend.
The AG is not an exclusive or by “invitation only” group and membership is free.

4.15    The group has previously agreed that more flight training institutions (e.g. Simuflight, Flight
Safety International and CAE Aviation Training) should be encouraged to attend to round out the
necessary expertise for the AG.

4.16    They also suggested representation from other OEMs (like Garmin, and Universal Avionics) as
well as Embraer should be approached and reminded of the effectiveness of the group.

4.17  The CNS/ATM AG 6 will be seeking further input from the FAA, NAV CANADA, ICAO,
EASA and Eurocontrol to provide information and guidance on CNS/ATM implementations.

4.18    It was suggested as well that an increase in operator participation would be a benefit to the
balance of the group.

4.19    The secretary will follow up on these items as it is intended to continue to promote attendance
and participation in AG meetings.

4.20    The secretary noted some of the previously identified participants had been contacted for this
meeting. Several of those invited had sent regrets (e.g. FAA, ATT, Home Depot, NAV CANADA,
Universal Avionics, etc.) and advised they are interested and will attend future meetings as appropriate.

4.21     The group also discussed frequency and location of AG meetings. It was noted that Europe
needs to be included in the rotation of the meetings as they are an important part of the group and deal
directly with the Eurocontrol and EASA organizations as well as having an effective grasp of the
European situation.

4.22    It was noted that the largest participation at the meetings is from the North American region and
it would be unfortunate to lose this participation by stringent rotation to Europe. It was suggested that
every third meeting could be held in Europe or more frequent if circumstances dictated.

4.23   As far as location for the next meeting was concerned the group commented that if participation
from EASA and Eurocontrol was expected, Cologne or Brussels would probably be the best locations.

4.24   It was also felt that a three day meeting would probably be necessary to address all the concerns
expressed during this meeting.
5. CNS/ATM Information

  5.1      The secretary reviewed the CNS/ATM Technology Development Roadmap which is a
  living/changing document and will be subject to continuous revisions. He noted that it is still difficult
  to obtain CNS/ATM implementation plans for some of the ICAO regions.

  5.2     It will also be arduous to keep the roadmap up to date as a lot of the information changes
  frequently in the ICAO regions.

  5.3     The roadmap is published with a version number and date (currently Vers. 01 from November
  2009) so that anyone reviewing the data will be able to determine when the last update was completed.

  5.4    Comments were received from the members of the AG and these have been incorporated and a
  new version will be posted in May 2010.

  5.5     It was again noted that the previous review of the Strategic Projection of Airspace
  Requirements and Certification (SPARC) software tool should not be forgotten. This would be an
  invaluable tool and is being pursued with ICAO.

  5.6     The CNS/ATM Technology Development Roadmap is available on the websites even though
  some information may be incomplete or out of date. The data will still be relevant and some of the links
  from the document will be of use to the aviation community.

  5.7   The reviewed version is attached to the minutes as Appendix I and it is also hyperlinked to the
  IBAC CNS/ATM Guidance Material.

6. CNS/ATM on the World Wide Web

  6.1   The secretary updated the group on the status of the IBAC website and the NBAA sponsored
  IBAC SharePoint website.

  6.2  The IBAC CNS/ATM AG sections of the websites contain information and links relative to
  CNS/ATM.

  6.3     Items such as the CNS/ATM Advisory Group AG TOR, CNS/ATM AG minutes, presentations
  given to the AG, minutes of the FIG/CNSG and ATMG meetings, the Global ANP, library of
  CNS/ATM documents, ICAO Regional Plans and any other CNS/ATM information and links of
  assistance to the IBAC community.

  6.4     The CNS/ATM AG members are invited to review the sites and comment on content.

  6.5     A screen capture of the NBAA sponsored IBAC SharePoint CNS/ATM AG webpage is
  attached at Appendix E.

  6.6     The AG members who are not already registered should advise the secretary of the AG by
  email of their interest in gaining access to the Sharepoint site in order to receive an invitation to join the
  site.

  6.7      A chat forum has been set up within the CNS/ATM AG portion of the SharePoint website. The
  forum could assist AG members interaction on items that have not yet reached maturity or that need
  further discussion, and the site can also be used for extensive downloads.

7. Input to Groups

  7.1     IBAC has a standing commitment to provide representation at international forums on an on-
  going basis.
  7.2      To facilitate the representation in relation to current issues with the data link mandates,
  members have been acquiring and analysing data to assist with knowledgeable interventions on behalf
  of international business aviation.

  7.3       The AG chairman assisted by IBAC staff has met with NAV CANADA to avail of their
  statistical capabilities in relation to the NAT. An analysis of data provided to date follows.

  7.4    In July 2007 there were 35847 total flights of which 2350 were IGA (6.5%). While July 2009
  1352 were IGA.

  7.5    The same statistical percentages were seen in 2007 and 2009. 34.3% of the IGA flights were
  between FL340 – FL390.

  7.6    Eastbound there was 2.7% (402 flights) of the IGA flights on the Organized Track System
  (OTS), westbound there was 2.5% (382 flights) on the OTS for a total of 5.2% E&W on OTS.

  7.7     The 15,039 flights by Business Aircraft in 2009 were conducted by 2,726 different airframes.

  7.8     The total IGA flights between FL370 - FL400 was 4291.

  7.9     The reference data is shown in Appendix H. The first page is the analysis of NAV CANADA
  data and the following pages are collated from the NBAA IOC questionnaires put out by David Stohr
  and responded by attendees. The last page is a brief summary of some of the FAA data.

  7.10    198 respondents provided the data and David collated the information.

  7.11    The replies indicate 48% of the operators utilize FL 350 – FL400 with FL390 &FL400 being
  heavily preferred both east and westbound.

  7.12     It was noted that the flight level band for the NAT data link mandate has yet to be determined.
  In this regard the group has previously discussed several options.

  7.13    The group generally agreed that the setting of FL350-FL400 for exclusionary use within the
  core tracks for datalink equipped aircraft as described above starting 7 February 2013 would probably
  be acceptable for business aviation.

  7.14   The group was more concerned about the beyond 2013 mandate and discussed ideas such as
  phased implementation, altitude exclusions, aircraft exemptions (i.e. mixed environment), “Blue
  Spruce” route exemptions and other potential workarounds.

  7.15    The group were also aware that the European regulatory body has advised some manufacturers
  to request an exemption to the European datalink mandate.

  7.16   The exemption request will be looked at in in relation to extraordinary cost and lack of
  equipment availability.

  7.17   Exemptions may be given until the aircraft can be retrofit and in some cases for smaller aircraft
  the exemption may be for the life of the aircraft.

8. News and Views

  8.1     This is a standing agenda item and is intended to provide the most up to date information
  available just prior to the meeting and of interest to the group.

  8.2     The information provided to this meeting is included at Appendix G.
9. CNS/ATM Technologies

  9.1     With regard to flight recorders, ICAO has proposed amendments to Annex 6 Part 1, 2 and 3 and
  the FAA has launched a rule on CVR and DFDR regulations http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/2010-
  31.htm. EASA have a Notice of Proposed Amendment (NPA) out for the changes too and Eurocae
  ED112 has superseded ED55 and ED56.

  9.2     The FAA proposed rule requires all FAA regulated aircraft to have TSO-124a approved CVRs
  fitted which have a 2 hour recording duration.

  9.3     The recording of datalink messages by most manufacturers will be to the CVR rather than in a
  separate recorder.

  9.4    The compliance date for newly manufactured aircraft operating under part 91 for the ten-minute
  backup power source for CVRs is April 6, 2012.

  9.5   The compliance date for newly manufactured aircraft operating under part 91 for increased
  DFDR sampling rates is April 6, 2012.

  9.6     The compliance date for newly manufactured aircraft operating under part 121, 125, or 135 for
  increased DFDR sampling rates is December 6, 2010.

  9.7      The compliance date after which newly installed datalink systems must include recording
  capability for aircraft operating under part 91 for recording of datalink communications is April 6, 2012.

  9.8      The compliance date after which newly installed datalink systems must include recording
  capability for aircraft operating under part 121, 125, or 135 for recording of datalink communications is
  December 6, 2010.

  9.9     The proposed amendments to Annex 6 are available for review under “shared documents” at
  NBAA IBA C Sharepoint website.

  9.10    The Eurocae ED112 expands the number of recording systems from two, CVR and DFDR to
  four, CVR, DFDR, Datalink Recorders, Flight Video Recorders.

  9.11     RNP SAAAR (Special Aircraft and Aircrew Authorization Required) approaches include
  unique capabilities that require special aircraft and aircrew authorization similar to Category (CAT)
  II/III ILS operations.

  9.12    All RNP SAAAR approaches have reduced lateral obstacle evaluation areas and vertical
  obstacle clearance surfaces predicated on the aircraft and aircrew performance requirements of this AC.

  9.13     A critical component of RNP is the ability of the aircraft navigation system to monitor its
  achieved navigation performance, and to identify for the pilot whether the operational requirement is or
  is not being met during an operation.

  9.14    Any operator with an appropriate operational approval (i.e., Operations Specifications
  (OpsSpec), Letter of Authorization (LOA), or Management Specifications (MSpecs)) may conduct
  specified RNP SAAAR instrument approach procedures, in a similar manner that operators with the
  proper authorization may conduct CAT II and CAT III ILS operations.

  9.15    RNP “special aircraft and aircrew and authorization required (SAAAR)” approaches are
  beginning to gain momentum for business aviation.
  9.16  During the discussion it became evident that jurisdictions (e.g. EASA, FAA, and NAV
  CANADA) are interpreting the regulations differently. This creates difficulties for the business aviation
  community trying to obtain certification/approval.

  9.17    It was agreed to describe the difficulties on paper and bring them to the attention of the
  appropriate regulatory groups at the next CNS/ATM AG in Europe.

  9.18    Andre Gauthier (Bombardier) agreed to gather the data in a defined step by step document and
  using email (and perhaps conference calls) clarify the issues amongst the members of the group prior to
  discussion with the regulatory groups.

  9.19    The group also requires a better understanding of the GOLD before moving too far into the
  issues.

  9.20  It was noted that the process differs within regions on different approvals or certifications (i.e.
  ADS-B, ADS-C, SAAAR/RNP AR, and CPDLC).

  9.21    It was also expressed by the group that having the ability to operationally test systems while
  enroute from departure point to destination is an asset. It assists during the development and testing
  stage of new systems such as ADS-C and CPDLC for business aircraft and is not considered a
  hindrance to approval/certification.

  9.22   It was suggested that linkages could be established from within the IBAC CNS/ATM
  Technology Roadmap.

  9.23    This item will be added to the IOU/Action List and explored further over the next few months.

10. Action Plan

  10.1   The secretary reviewed the status of outstanding items from the CNS/ATM AG 4 action list not
  addressed during this meeting. The item numbers have been changed to reflect this meeting number and
  the AG 5 action list has been updated and is shown in Appendix F.

  10.2   Item 5-2 “to identify and discuss the possible disconnects between NextGen and SESAR”. See
  “Avionics Magazine article Friday, January 1, 2010 NextGen Special Section: Stacking Up SESAR,
  NextGen” hyperlink http://www.aviat iontoday.com/av/categories/commercial/6540 9.ht ml.

  10.3      Item 5-4 “Continue discussion with ICAO concerning the “One Stop Shop” concept and the
  Geographic Information System (GIS) portal contents for IBAC CNS/ATM information.” Discussions
  have been on-going with ICAO and they now see that there is a continuing need for a single location for
  all the Regions to provide their implementation plans and mandates. The GIS points of contact have
  been busy with other requirements but lately the D/ANB has become aware of on-going requirements
  for this item. They have also been given a copy of the AG Roadmap for reference.

  10.4    The task is huge as information is scattered all over the place and in many types of documents.
  The intent of the GIS information would be to have the information stored in one location, available to
  everyone who needs it and updated frequently.

  10.5     Item 5-7 is to “Identify and recommend as necessary AG/IBAC representatives to CNS/ATM
  related groups for input/reporting on PBN, NEXTGEN, SESAR, OPLINK Panel, RTCA SC214, etc.”
  Craig Morris (THANE/FAA) attends the RTCA SC 214 and has agreed to brief the AG on items of
  interest or concern to the group related to CNS/ATM. Also Sean Sheldon (Gulfstream) has agreed
  (subject to formalized arrangements) to represent IBAC on the new OPLINK group when it meets.

  10.6    Item 5-8 is to “Monitor the developments of the RCP implementation plan for the NAT Region
  which is aiming to mandate RCP by 2015.” This item is still on track for a datalink mandate in 2015
with mitigation for aircraft not able to equip by the deadline. However some issues are still to be
overcome before acceptance of RCP240 or RCP400 in the NAT.

10.7    Item 5-10 “Monitor and report on the development of the contingency procedures for loss of
data link in one or more of the NAT Oceanic Control Areas (OCA) and the study on the feasibility of
reverting to voice procedures in the event of the data link failure.” At the ATMG/35 Canada and
Ireland agreed to further develop generic information taking account of the input provided by the group
and to coordinate the development of an amendment to incorporate the procedures provided by each
NAT ANSP. The resulting amendments would be submitted to NAT ATMG/36. Procedures are being
developed for inclusion in the NAT Contingency Procedures Document (NAT Doc 006).

10.8     Item 5-13 “Monitor and report on the status of the use of SATCOM voice for routine ATS
communications.” Discussion is taking place in support of the use of “non-integrated” SATCOM voice
systems in the NAT Region. The terminology used should distinguish between “integrated” and “non-
integrated” systems by referring instead to “installed” and “portable” SATCOM voice systems, so as to
clarify which systems are being discussed.

10.9    Item 5-16 “The AG will monitor the work of the “Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics
(RTCA) Special Committee 214” in relation to their development of datalink services and
NextGen/SESAR to ensure they are Global and meet IBAC’s requirements.” See 10.5 above. It was also
previously agreed that Bill Stine (NBAA) will also be asked to monitor the “RTCA SC 214” on behalf
of the CNS/ATM AG and report any items of interest to the group.

10.10 Item 5-18 “Monitor and report on Version 19 of the “NAT Data Link Guidance Material”
which is to be published during the first half of 2009.” The NAT IMG is expected to endorse the GOLD
(and therefore the GOLD will subsume the Guidance Material for ATS Data Link Services in the North
Atlantic Airspace (NAT Data Link Guidance Material)) and at its next meeting the NAT SPG/46 should
endorse the GOLD for use.

10.11 Item 5-19 “Monitor and report on the development of procedures to ensure that flight crews are
provided information related to satellite communication service outages. “ A new type of document, the
NAT Operations Bulletin (NAT Ops Bulletin), has been created to facilitate the posting of “third party”
documents such as AICs, guidance material for clearance delivery via data link, etc. on the ICAO
EUR/NAT website: http://www.paris.icao.int/.

10.12 NAT Operations Bulletins also allow the NAT SPG to directly promulgate information such as
the Oceanic Errors Safety Bulletin, flight crew guidance for 5 minutes separation between GNSS
equipped aircraft, etc. The NAT OPS Bulletin Checklist contains a list of all current NAT Operations
Bulletins and will be re-issued whenever a Bulletin is added or deleted.

10.13 Item 5-20 “Monitor and report when the finalized draft document of the NAT Operational
Contingency Plan is available on the ICAO NAT PCO website.” The task of migrating the content of
the NAT PCO website to the ICAO EUR/NAT website: www.paris.icao.int has been accomplished and
documentation pertinent to the NAT Region can be accessed by following the links to Documents and
then to NAT Docs. The NAT Contingency Plan will be numbered as NAT DOC 006.

10.14 Item 5-21 “The CNS/ATM AG 3 agreed that representatives to the working groups should meet
by teleconference prior to each new meeting whenever possible.” Regular telecons have been on-going
(approximately 9) since AG/4 particularly in relation to the working papers that have been developed.

10.15 Item 5-24 “Monitor and report on the status of declaring developing systems fully
“operational”.” The NAT IMG has agreed that the system will only become operational when the new
NAT DLMA becomes fully operational.

10.16 Item 5-25 refers to “Monitor and report on the timeframe for mandate of ADS-B OUT in
Europe presently scheduled for 2015.” The likely dates for ADS-B OUT are 2015 to update current
  aircraft and 2012 for new aircraft, with a couple of years grace for aircraft retiring from service . The
  European “Implementing Rule” is now out for public. Some of the relevant EU Datalink documents
  and ADS-B OUT information can be found on the Eurocontrol Cascade website.

11. Next Meeting

  11.1    The fifth meeting of the CNS/ATM AG was discussed and suggestions were put forward for
  possible locations and timing.

  11.2   It was agreed to tentatively schedule the next meeting in Cologne, Germany, November, 13/14,
  2010. This date will be finalized during a conference call in July.

  11.3    EASA and Eurocontrol will be encouraged to attend and provide presentations. It was also
  suggested that a prior meeting with EBAA would be appropriate.

12. Other Business

  12.1    IBAC has a set of policies on various technical and operational issues. They are reviewed on a
  regular basis in an attempt to keep them up to date.

  12.2   One of the policies adopted 8 or 9 years ago deals with Required Navigation Performance
  (RNP).

  12.3    This policy has been superseded by events and now the policy needs to be updated in the
  context of today‟s Performance Based Navigation (PBN) world.

  12.4    The group briefly addressed this item and assisted in the amendment of the policy.

  12.5     Due to time constraints discussion had to be curtailed and the group agreed to assist via email
  after the meeting. See amended version in Appendix J.

  12.6     Prior to the meeting information on European proposed new rules for MODE-S and aircraft
  registration downlinks in lieu of SSR codes, had been circulated by email for review.

  12.7    The EBAA had asked if there were any comments from the group.

  12.8    The group did not have any comments at this time and agreed to provide future comments by
  email to EBAA, attention Pedro (pedrovazua@ebaa.org).
                             APPENDIX A – LIST OF PARTICIPANTS



ASSOCIATION MEMBERS

   Peter Ingleton (IBAC) +

   Brian Bowers (IBAC) *

   Steve Brown (NBAA)

   Jens Hennig (GAMA)



AVIONICS / AIRCRAFT MANUFACTURERS

   Andre Gauthier (Bombardier)

   Jake Biggs (Cessna)

   Marc Valle (DFJ)

   Jerry Mettes (Honeywell)

   Ron Weight (Honeywell)



GUESTS/OBSERVERS/PRESENTORS/SERVICE PROVIDERS

 Craig Morris (Thane/FAA)



OPERATORS

  Charles Matthews (NetJets)

  Tom Taylor (NJI)



TRAINING ORGANIZATIONS

  David Stohr (ATI)



    Chairman +

    Secretary *
                                LIST OF CONTACTS

ASSOCIATION      Pedro Vicente Azua (EBAA)       Avenue de Tervuren 13 a / Box 5,
MEMBERS                                          BE-1040. Brussels
                                                 Belgium
                                                 Tel: +322 766 0070
                                                 Fax: +322 768 1325
                                                 E-mail:pedrovazua@ebaa.org

                 S teve Brown (NBAA)             1200 18th STR NW Suite #400,
                                                 Washington, DC, 20036
                                                 USA
                                                 Tel: +1 202 783 9350
                                                 Fax: +1 202 331 8364
                                                 E-mail:sbrown@nbaa.org

                 Don S pruston (IBAC)            Suite 16.33, 999 Rue University St.
                                                 Montreal, Quebec
                                                 H3C 5J9
                                                 Canada
                                                 Tel: +1 778 329 3242
                                                 Fax: +1 604 614 5459
                                                 E-mail:dg@ibac.org

                 Peter Ingleton (IBAC)           Suite 16.33, 999 Rue University
                                                 Montreal, Tel: Quebec
                                                 H3C 5J9
                                                 Canada
                                                 Tel: +1 514 954 8054
                                                 Fax: +1 514 954 6161
                                                 E-mail:pingleton@ibac.org

                 Brian Bowers (IBAC) *           113-79 Bedros Ln.,
                                                 Halifax, N.S., B3M 4X5
                                                 Canada
                                                 Tel: 1 902 462 4665
                                                 Fax: 1 902 462 4665
                                                 E-mail:bpbowers@ns.sympatico.ca

                 Keisuke Kamo (JBAA) (Fuji       1-1-11 Yonan,
                Heavy Industries)                Utsunomiya Tochigi,
                                                 320-8564,
                                                 Japan
                                                 Tel: +81 28 684 7005
                                                 Fax: + 81 28 684 7071
                                                 E-mail:kamok@uae.subaru-fhi.co.jp

                Ali Ahmed Al Naqbi (M EBAA)      P O Box 47626
                                                 Abu Dhabi - United Arab Emirates
                                                 Tel: +971 4 319 9013
                                                 Fax: +971 4 319 9014
                                                 E-mail:ali.alnaqbi@mebaa.com

                 Guy Lachlan (BBGA)              19 Church Street.,
                                                 Brill, Aylesbury,
                                                 HP18 9RT , UK
                                                 Tel: +44 (0) 1844 238020
                                                 Fax: +44 (0) 1844 238087
                                                 E-mail:guy.lachlan@bbga.aero

AVIONICS /      Dr. Fassi Kafyeke (Bombardier)   C.P. 6087, Succ. Centre-Ville
AIRCRAFT/                                        M ontreal, Quebec
MANUFACTURERS                                    H3C 3G9,
                                                 Canada
                                                 Tel: +1 514 855 7186
                                                 Fax: +1 514855 8570
                                                 E-mail: fassi.kafyeke@aero.bombardier.com
 Jack Alford (Bombardier)        400 Cote Vertu West,
                                 Dorval, Quebec,
                                 H4S 1Y9
                                 Canada
                                 Tel: +1 514 855 7528
                                 Fax:
                                 E-mail: jack.alford@aero.bombardier.com

 Leo Knaapen (Bombardier)        400 Cote Vertu West,
                                 Dorval, Quebec,
                                 H4S 1Y9
                                 Canada
                                 Tel: +1 514 855 7988
                                 Cell +1-514 824 7396
                                 Fax: +1 514 9495
                                 E-mail: leo.knaapen@aero.bombardier.com

Andre Gauthier (Bombardier)      E-mail: andre.gauthier@aero.bombardier.com

 Marc Valle (DFJ)
                                 44 Ave Roi Albert
                                 06400-Cannes,
                                 France
                                 Tel: +334 9259 3316
                                 Fax:
                                 E-mail: marclvalle@aol.com
Serge Lebourg (Dassault
Aviation)                        54, avenue M arcel Dassault BP24
                                 33701 M érignac
                                 France
                                 Tel: +33 5 56 13 9624
                                 Fax: 33 6 76 15 5391
                                 E-mail: Serge.LEBOURG@Dassault-Aviation.com
Christian Terrasse (Falconjet)
                                 E-mail: christian.terrasse@falconjet.com
 Jens Hennig (GAM A)

                                 1400 K Street, NW, Suite 801
                                 Washington, DC 20005
                                 Tel: +1 202 393 1500
                                 Direct          +1 202 637 1378
                                 Cell: +1 202 262 1650
                                 Fax: +1 202 842 4063
 Sean Sheldon (Gulfstream)       E-mail: jhennig@GAM A.aero

                                 500 Gulfstream Rd M /S A-12,
                                 Savannah, Georgia,
                                 31407
                                 Cell; +1 912 484 6052
                                 Tel: + 1 912 965-3640
                                 Fax: + 1 912 965 7024
Brett Rundle (Gulfstream)        E-mail: sean.sheldon@gulfstream.com

                                 P.O.         Box       2206,        M /S      A-12
                                 Savannah, GA
                                 31402-2206                                     USA
                                 Tel: +                                 912-965-3245
                                 Cell: +1                               912-441-5345
                                 Fax: +1 912-965-7524
Dave Sherrington (Gulfstream)    E-mail: brett.rundle@gulfstream.com

 Adam Evanschwartz (Rockwell     E-mail: Dave.Sherrington@gulfstream.com
Collins)

                                 400 Collins Road NE,
                                 124-115 Cedar Rapids, IA,
                                 52498, USA
                                 Tel: + 1 319 295 0575
                               Cell + 1 319 573 6319
 David Wu (Rockwell Collins)   Fax: +
                               E-mail: asevansc@rockwellcollins.com

                               400 Collins Road NE,
                               124-115 Cedar Rapids, IA,
                               52498, USA
 Ronald Weight (Honeywell)     Tel: +1 319-295-6949
                               Cell + 1 319-573-4151
                               E-mail: dcwu@rockwellcollins.com

                               20 Airport Road
                               Morristown, NJ
                               07960 U.S.A.
                               Tel: +1 973-455-5883
 Chris Benich (Honeywell)      Cell: + 1-973-452-8717
                               Fax: +1 973-455-5886
                               E-mail: ronald.weight@honeywell.com

                               101 Constitution Ave.,
                               Washington, DC, 20001
 Jerry Mettes (Honeywell)      Tel: +202 662 2662
                               Fax: +
                               E-mail: chris.benich@honeywell.com

                               21111 N. 19th Ave.,
                               Phoenix, Ax
                               85029 USA
Lyle Kendall (Honeywell)       Tel: +1 602 436 3831
                               Fax: +1 602 436 4254
                               E-mail: jerry.mettes@honeywell.com

                               M ail Stop B13B
                               PO Box 97001
                               Redmond, WA
                               98073-9710 USA
Kimberly Ten Pas Bell          Tel: +1425 885-8874
(Honeywell)                    Cell: +1 425 503 6103
                               E-mail: lyle.kendall@honeywell.com
 Jacob (Jake) Biggs (Cessna)
                               E-mail: TenPasBell@honeywell.com


                               3 Cessna Blvd.
                               Wichita, KS
                               67215 USA
                               Tel: + 1 316-517-8570
 Luis Malizia (Embraer)        Cell: + 1 316-655-4086
                               Fax: + 1 316-206-4667
                               E-mail:jbiggs@cessna.textron.com

                               São             José          dos      Campos
                               São Paulo, Brazil
Carey Miller (Universal        Tel: +
Avionics)                      Fax: +
                               E-mail:luis.malizia@embraer.com.br

                               3260 E. Universal Way
                               Tucson, Arizona
                               85756, USA
                               Tel: + 1 (520) 807-7426
                               Cell: + 1
Anita Trotter-Cox (ACGI)       Fax: + 1 (520) 295-2390
                               E-mail: cmiller@uasc.com


                               1835-F Forest Drive
                               Annapolis M D
                                         21401, USA
                                         Tel: + 1 (410) 990-9550
                                         Cell: + 1
                                         Fax: + 1 (410) 990-9556
                                         E-mail: atc@aviationmanuals.com

S ERVICE    Marty Tate (NAV CANADA)      77 M etcalfe St.
PROVIDERs                                Ottawa, ON., K1P 5L7,
                                         Canada
                                         Tel: +1 613 563 7988
                                         Fax: +1 613 563 5202
                                         E-mail: tatem@navcanada.ca
            Jeff Cochrane (NAV CANADA)
                                         77 M etcalfe Street, 5th Floor
                                         Ottawa, Ontario, K1P 5L6
                                         Canada
                                         Tel: +1 (613) 563-3740
                                         Fax: +1 613
            Ahmad Usmani (FAA)           E-mail: cochraj@navcanada.ca

                                         800 Independence Ave., SW
                                         Washington, D.C.
                                         20024, USA
                                         Tel: +1-202-267 3391
                                         Cell:
                                         Fax: +1-
            Craig Morris (Thane/FAA)     E-mail: ahmad.usmani@faa.gov

                                         800 Independence Ave., SW
                                         Suite 509
                                         Washington, D.C.
                                         20024, USA
                                         Tel: +1-202-493-4498
                                         Cell:
                                         Fax: +1-202-493-5057
             Mike Hritz                  E-mail: craig.ctr.morris@faa.gov
            (FAA ATO-P)
                                         800 Independence Ave SW (Portals)
                                         Washington DC
                                         20591, USA
                                         Tel: +1- (202) 385-7198
                                         Cell:
                                         Fax: +1-
            Mike Rockwell (ARINC)        E-mail: mike.hritz@faa.gov

                                         2551 Riva Rd
                                         Annapolis, M D
                                         21401-7465, USA
                                         Tel: +1- (301) 858-2996
                                         Cell:
                                         Fax: +1- (301) 858-2047
                                         E-mail: mdr@arinc.com
OPERATORS   Richard Buergel (NetJets)    4111 Bridgeway Avenue
                                         Columbus, OH 43219-1882
                                         Tel: +1 614-849-7541
                                         Cell: +1 614-371-6466
                                         Fax: +1 614-239-2437
                                         E-mail: rbuergel@netjets.com

            Charles Matthews (NetJets)   108 Traders Cross;
                                         Suite 200
                                         Okatie, SC
                                         29909
                                         Tel: +1 843 298-6225
                                         Cell: +1 860 428-0519
                                         Fax: +1
                                         E-mail: Cmatthews@netjets.com
                Dave McCormick (NetJets)   4111 Bridgeway Avenue
                                           Columbus, Ohio
                                           43219 USA
                                           Tel: +1 614 239-2557
                                           Cell: +1 614 620-2941
                                           Fax: +1 614 239-2437
                                           E-mail: dmccormick@netjets.com

                Tom Taylor (NJI, Inc)      28 Farnsleigh Ave
                                           Bluffton, SC
                                           29910, USA
                                           Tel: +1 (843) 705-8062
                                           Cell: +1 (843) 816-0933
                                           Fax: +1
                                           E-mail: ttaylor@netjets.com

                John Trolan (NetJets)      E-mail: jtrolan@netjets.com

                Craig Foskey (AT&T)        Tel: +1 404 731 3437
                                           Cell: +1
                                           Fax: +1
                                           E-mail: cf0570@att.com

                Gary Dietz (AT&T)          Tel: +1 214 351 8822
                                           Cell: +1 925 550 3636
                                           Fax: +1 214 353 6086
                                           E-mail: gd5493@att.com

                Bill McBride (HomeDepot)   4135 South Airport Rd..,
                                           Atlanta, Georgia
                                           30336, USA
                                           Tel: +1 (770) 384-3827
                                           Cell: +1        (678) 725-0981
                                           Fax: +1 (770) 384-3840
                                           E-mail: bill_mcbride@homedepot.com

TRAINING        David S tohr (ATI)         1132 Dusk Dr.,
ORGANIZATIONS                              Keller, TX.,
                                           76248, USA
                                           Tel: +1 817 337 1058
                                           Cell: +1 682 556 6991
                                           Fax: +1 817 337 4087
                                           E-mail:davidstohr@trainati.com
                            APPENDIX B – RNP Section for Doc 005



REQUIRED NAVIGATION PERFORMANCE (RNP)


Performance-based navigation (PBN) is a framework for defining a navigation
performance specification along a route, during a procedure, or in airspace within which an
aircraft must comply with specified operational performance requirements. It provides a
simple basis for the design and implementation of automated flight paths and for airspace
design, aircraft separation, and obstacle clearance. It also offers a straightforward means to
communicate the performance and operational capabilities necessary for the utilization of
such paths and airspace. Within the framework of performance-based navigation, the
aviation industry has defined area navigation (RNAV) and required navigation
performance (RNP) specifications that can be satisfied by a range of navigation systems.

RNP is RNAV with on-board navigation monitoring and alerting, RNP is also a statement
of navigation performance necessary for operation within a defined airspace. A critical
component of RN P is the ability of the aircraft navigation system to monitor its achieved
navigation performance, and to identify for the pilot whether the operational requirement is,
or is not being met during an operation. This on-board performance monitoring and alerting
capability therefore allows a lessened reliance on air traffic control intervention (via radar
monitoring, automatic dependent surveillance (ADS), multilateration, communications),
and/or route separation to achieve the overall safety of the operation. RN P capability of the
aircraft is a major component in determining the separation criteria to ensure that the overall
containment of the operation is met. The RNP capability of an aircraft will vary depending
on the aircraft equipment and the navigation infrastructure. For example, an aircraft may be
equipped and certified for RN P 1 .0, but may not be capable of RN P 1 .0 operations due to
limited navaid coverage.

Figure xx shows how RNAV and RN P have improved the navigational process. Using the
current ground navaids, the aircraft has to fly from beacon to beacon, often taking an
inefficient route in order to pick up the signals at the appropriate place in the air. The dotted
boxes indicate the expanse of the area in the sky that the aircraft could be in as it picks up
those ground-based signals. This requires air traffic control to create larger areas of separation
between aircraft, in order to maintain safety. In the RNAV and RNP routing, however, the
dotted areas are far smaller, indicating that the aircraft can fly a much more precise route in
the air. Additionally, the graphic illustrates the RNP "radius of turn" ability, essentially
indicating how RN P enables the aircraft to make much tighter, more precise turns in the air.
                     Figure xx: Performance-Based Navigation RNA V/RNP
                                                               –




Certain RNP operations require advanced features of the onboard navigation function and
approved training and crew procedures. These operations must receive approvals that are
characterized as Special Aircraft and Aircrew Authorization Required (SAAAR), similar to
approvals required for operations to conduct instrument landing system (ILS) Category II and
III approaches. Approximately 50 percent of transport-category aircraft are capable of basic
RN P operations, and 25-30 percent is capable of RN P SAAA R approach operations.
Industry-wide forecasts predict that 80-90 percent of transport category aircraft will be capable
of basic RN P operations by 2017. Many business aviation aircraft are also capable of RNAV
and basic RN P operations (approximately 75 percent being Global Positioning System [GPS]-
equipped).

Some piston aircraft are capable of RNAV and basic RNP, with nearly half of all general
aviation instrument flight rules (IFR) aircraft equipped with IFR-certified GPS navigation
systems. RNAV and RNP specifications facilitate more efficient design of airspace and
procedures, which collectively result in improved safety, access, capacity, predictability,
operational efficiency, and environmental effects.
The following table summarizes the goals of the NAT Reg ion PBN transition plans:

                               NAT REGION PB N TRANSITION PLAN
                AIRS PAC E                                    NAVIGATION SPECIFICATIONS

NAT FL430 and above                           TBD
                                              Until <date TBD>: M NPS
                                              WATRS: RNP 10
NA T FL410                                    Fro m <date TBD>: MNPS
                                              RNP 10/M NPS
                                              WATRS: RNP 10
                                              Until <date TBD> 2012: MNPS
                                              WATRS: RNP 10
                                              From <date TBD> 2012 - 7 February 2013: M NPS RNP
                                              4/MNPS on the 3 central NAT OTS tracks. WATRS:
                                              RNP 10
NAT FL350 – FL400                             Fro m 7 February 2013 – 5 February 2015: MNPS RNP
                                              4/M NPS on all NAT OTS tracks
                                              WATRS: RNP 10

                                              Fro m 5 February 2015: RNP 4/MNPS
                                              WATRS: RNP 10

                                              Until <date TBD>: M NPS
                                              WATRS: RNP 10
NAT FL290 – FL340                             Fro m <date TBD>: MNPS
                                              RNP 10/M NPS
                                              WATRS: RNP 10

NAT FL060 – FL280                             TBD
Outside Greenland, Faroe Islands, Iceland,
Azores and Bermuda.
NAT SFC – FL050                               TBD
Outside Greenland, Faroe Islands, Iceland,
Azores and Bermuda.
Greenland SFC – FL190                         TBD
Faroe Islands SFC – 7500‟ A SL                TBD
Iceland SFC – FL190                           TBD
Azores SFC – FLxxx                            TBD
Bermuda SFC – FLxxx                           TBD



Note 1: RNP10/MNPS signifies that, in addition to the RNP10 approval, an MNPS approval is required for the non -navspec
         part of the operational approval.

Note 2: RNP4/M NPS signifies that, in addition to the RNP4 approval, an MNPS approval is required for the non -navspec
         part of the operational approval.

Detailed guidance material on RN P is contained in the Performance-based Navigation Manual (Doc 9613). It should be noted
that any plans to transition to PBN operations should be in accordance with provisions contained in Doc 9613.
                                                                                         NAT CNSG/2.        –


                                                                                         IP/07

                                                                                                   22/03/10




                                    APPENDIX C – IP07 from CNSG/2

                        NORTH ATLANTIC
          COMMUNICATIONS NAVIGATION SURVEILLANCE GROUP
                           (NAT CNSG)
                                             SECOND MEETING

                                        (Limerick, March 22 26, 2010)
                                                             –




Agenda Item 8:        Any other business


                         Operator costs related to 2015 NAT Data Link Mandate


                                           (Provided by Canada)



Appendix A to this paper provides preliminary estimates of what it would cost NAT operators to retrofit
their aircraft with FANS 1/A to comply with the NAT 2015 data link mandate. It was recently circulated to the
EFG Mandate Analysis Task Force as Version 2A. This is merely an information paper for the group and
therefore contains no recommendations. However members of the Group are encouraged to provide comments
for possible improvement.

                                       - Appendix A is provided separately -
             Appe ndix A to IP/07 - Operator costs related to 2015 NAT Data Link Mandate

                                          Preliminary analysis related to
                                         NAT 2015 data link mandate costs
                                           N. Dimock, NAV CANADA
                                                 March 16, 2010

1. Objective

An analysis was performed to estimate the cost of retrofitting certain categories of the nonFANS-equipped
aircraft that presently fly the NAT core, to gain some insight to the potential cost to operators from the proposed
2015 NAT data link mandate.

2. Procedure

2.1.            The analysis used the following retrofit item costs, which were derived from est imates
received from datalink authorities at three large USA airlines. Whereas those estimates varied widely, the costs
here are intended as conservative figures to apply to any long-haul aircraft type. It is expected that actual costs on
average would be substantially higher. For SATCOM, Iridium estimates were used rather than higher Inmarsat
estimates.

All costs in US$
 one Out Of Service day           $40K
 FANS SW                          $35K purc has e                  0          OOS days
 GPS                             $200K purc has e                 15          OOS days
 Satcom (Iridium)                 $35K purc has e                  3          OOS days


   2.2. The following table applies those estimates to retrofitting of aircraft that would have various existing
   SATCOM and GPS equipages. It was assumed that all retrofits on a given aircraft would be done together,
   to minimize total out-of-service days.

All costs in US$
Aircraft existing Equipment       SATCOM        GPS               SATCOM        No ADS-C
                                  GPS           No SATCOM         No GPS        No GPS

                                  No ADS-C No ADS-C               No ADS-C No Satcom

Cost to retrofit one aircraft $35K              $190K             $835K         $870K

Note: The above estimates would be especially conservative for any aircraft that presently lacks a Pegasus-era FMC,
which is an additional requirement for supporting FANS. The related additional cost would be between
$65K+3daysOOS and $350K+21daysOOS, depending on avionics specifics. FMC retrofit costs were not applied in
this analysis because no FMC equipage data was available.
   2.3. NAT core traffic for one week in August 2009 was studied. Flights that crossed the Gander/Shanwick
   boundary at 30west were examined to determine the aircraft registrations, types and any indications of
   satellite equipage („ DAT/..S‟) and GPS equipage („ NAV/..G‟).
   2.4 For further determination of satellite equipage, aircraft registrations were looked up in a comprehensive list
       of aircraft Inmarsat telephone numbers
   2.5 For further determination of GPS equipage, aircraft registrations were looked up in a GPS equipage list
       that was derived from airline survey (by Nav Canada) data and from actual ADSB transmissions data from
       Hudson Bay flights

       2.6. For determination of ADS-C equipage, aircraft registrations were identified in ADS-C position reports
       for the same traffic. Aircraft that provided position reports by voice radio but not by ADS-C were counted as not
       FANS equipped (Operators should be very likely to use ADS-C if they are equipped, because datalink charges for
       ADS-C are insignificant when compared to the substantial discount on communications charges that accrue in
       Gander airspace).

Important note : In this paper, FANS equipable means of a type of aircraft of which some members were
FANS equipped.

3. Results

3..1                 Aircraft counts
                         1638 total aircraft (distinct registrations)
                         1411 (86%) were FANS equipable
                         747 (46%) were FANS equipped
                        ➢ 53% of the FANS equipable aircraft
                         891 (54%) were not FANS equipped
                        ➢ 694 (78%) of those were FANS equipable
                         277 were B767s, the most prevalent Type
                         only 23 of those were FANS equipped

3.2. The following chart shows the counts of FANS equipable aircraft that evidently were equipped [black
bars], and not equipped [white bars]




         3.3.   Combining equipage results with retrofit item costs.




                                                                2
All costs in US$
      Aircraft existing     SATCOM       GP S              SATCOM          No ADS-C
        equipment           GP S         No SATCOM         No GPS          No GPS
                            No ADS-C     No ADS -C         No ADS -C      No Satcom

     Cost to retrofit one      $35K          $190K             $835K           $870K
           aircra ft
       Aircraft count          179             63               178             274
    Costs totalling $405M      $6 M          $12 M            $149 M          $238 M

.
Aircraft existing           S A TC OM      GP S             SATCOM         No             Total Count        Cost I
equipment                   GP S           No SATCOM        No GPS         ADS-
                            No ADS -C      No ADS -C        No ADS -C      C No
         A332                   3               6                4         GP S 1               14            $          5
         A333                   2               2                3         No Satcom
                                                                                1               8             $          4
         A343                  13               0                16             2              31             $        16
         A345                   0               0                0              0               0             $         -
         A346                   0               0                0              0               0             $         -
         A388                   0               0                0              0               0             $         -
         B737                   0               0                1              5               6             $          5
         B744                  68               10               5              12              95            $        19
         B752                   0               17               10             67              94            $        70
         B762                   0               0                0              20              20            $        17
         B763                  61               27               76             70             234            $       13
         B764                  21               0                0              0              21             $         1
         B772                   0               0                2              0               2             $          2
         B77L                   0               0                0              0               0             $         -
        B77W                    0               0                2              0               2             $          2
         C17                    0               0                2              55              57            $        50
         C5                     0               0                0              7               7             $          6
        GLF4                    2               0                18             10              30            $        24
        GLF5                    2               0                32             0               34            $        27
        K35R                    0               0                1              3               4             $          3
        MD11                    7               1                6              21              35            $        24


4. Conclusion

4.1. Of course the cost of equipping any aircraft with FANS cannot be attributed in whole to the
2015 mandate. Even if the aircraft is equipped at that late date, it will benefit from access to dependent
reduced NAT separations and from datalink benefits in other airspaces. If it will use ADS-B, then the
cost of GNSS could be partly attributed to that. So ANSPs are not able to develop an accurate
assessment of the cost of a particular mandate per se on behalf of users. Only each user can do that for
their own situation. The best that ANSPs can do is estimate the overall cost of retrofitting.

4.2. The cost would probably exceed US$405M to provide FANS equipage for 694 FANS
equipable aircraft that are flying the NAT core and are presently not equipped. Of course that has only a
loose relationship to the potential operators‟ cost impact of the proposed 2015 NAT datalink
mandate, but to produce a more tightly related estimate may be impracticable. Uncertainties and
unknowns are discussed below. To the extent that they may persist or eventually cancel each other,
the above cost estimate could be as practically good as any that can be dervived for present purposes.

4.3. If true average retrofit item costs were to exceed the estimates used herein, that would directly
increase the cost impact. Such is very likely to be the case: The following table shows the wide variation
among the item cost estimates obtained from the three airlines that were surveyed.

   Survey estimates from three airlines
         one Out Of Service day          $40K,
                                        $100K
                                       $35K,   purc has e
         FANS S W                                                 0, 1              OOS days
                                       $40K
         GP S                           $350K purchase            15                OOS days
                                        $75K, purc has e          5, 14, 21         OOS days
         Satcom (Inmarsat)
                                        $300K
         (Iridium)
                                         $35K                     3, 7, 14
                                        $65K,
         FMC/ CMU upgrade                                         3, 21             OOS days
                                        $350K


Comparing those to estimates to the ones used herein (as per following table, repeated from 2.1
above) suggests that the latter are very conservative. If the worst-case FANS, GPS and Satcom
costs fro m the survey were substituted, the total cost would be US$1.1B.
   Conservative estimates used herein
         one Out Of Service day           $40K

         FANS S W                    $35K           purc has e    0                  OOS days

         GP S                        $200K          purc has e    15                 OOS days
         Satcom (Iridium)            $35K           purc has e    3                  OOS days


         FMC/ CMU upgrade                    n/ a                         n/a



4.4. Avoide d cost re garding EUR region mandate
Because equipping with FANS can gain exemption from the 2015 EUR Region data link
implementation rule, it may be useful to know what cost may be avoided in that manner. From
the information herein, that avoided cost can be estimated at $24M overall. That is the amount
shown in first table in 3.3 above as the cost of installing just FANS 1/A software, multiplied
by thr total of 694 aircraft. The cost of ATN CPDLC software would probably be less than that:

     It is in the CMU rather than the FMC.
     It is certified to a lower level (D).
     It is far less complex (smaller message set, no ADS-C, no integration for auto- load).
      Of course the EUR Region IR does not require SATCOM or GNSS.
5. Uncertainties and unknowns
To achieve estimates more tightly related to 2015 mandate costs, work on the following would be
required.

5.1. Unce rtainty re garding aircraft „unable to equip’
 a) The current draft proposal for the 2015 NAT data link mandate contains this Note: “Special
rules applicable to aircraft unable to equip ... will be published by the States concerned in
national AIPs”. That follows fro m the NAT IMG/35 statement that “...provisions should be
made to accommodate aircraft that could not be equipped in the time frame.”
 b) Unfortunately nothing is stated anywhere as to what “unable to equip” would mean. If it
refers to aircraft that are not FANS equipable as defined for the context of this paper, then the
cost estimate in the above conclus ion, and all of the related discussion herein is relevant.
However, if it refers to something broader like “aircraft that cannot be affordably retrofitted” or
“aircraft that do not have GPS” or “aircraft that have equipped for the EUR Region 2015 data link
imple mentation rule”, then we would need to look at how that would affect the total NAT
equipage percent that the mandate would achieve, and what that would cost.
 c) A working paper seeking clarification has been submitted for the March 2010 meeting of the
NAT CNS Group.

5.2. Unce rtainties that could be bias ing the estimates high
 a)     The above conclusion does not consider future aircraft retirements or reassignments. If
FANS equipable aircraft that fly the NAT were retired or shifted to other regions so as to
avoid the 2015 mandate, that would reduce the cost. The more expensive retrofits would be the
most likely to be avoided that way, and each one could amount to $870K.
 b)     There could be future retrofits for reasons other than the 2015 mandate. For example,
some aircraft will be retrofitted anyway to gain benefits from NAT reduced separations, or to be
exe mpted under the EUR Region 2015 Imple mentation Rule. However in the cases of older
aircraft that would be very expensive to retrofit, it is very unlikely that they would be upgraded
unless the 2015 mandate forces them. That is probably the situation for most of the B757s and
B767s, and they represent the main bulk of the potential retrofits.
 c)     If more of the aircraft were found to have GPS equipage, each one would reduce the cost
by as much as $800K. We know our database of GPS equipage is not co mplete, so so me
substantial reduction there is likely.
 d)     If more aircraft were found to have SATCOM, each one could reduce the cost further
by as much as $155K. However, we know our Inmarsat database is reasonably complete, so
substantial reduction there is unlikely.
 e)     If more aircraft were found to have FANS 1/A, each one could reduce the cost further
by as much as $35K. However, we regard ADS-C reporting as a reasonably reliable positive
or negative indicator of FANS equipage, so substantial reduction there is unlikely.
 f)     If retrofits can to some extent be performed during periods when the aircraft are out of
service for other necessities, then the out-of-service days cannot be wholly counted as costs
for the 2015 mandate. However, it has been noted that down time has been the show stopper
for equipping some older fleets with GNSS. Only the operator can decide how to attribute OOS
days.

5.3. Unce rtainties that could be bias ing the estimates low




                                                   5
a)      If aircraft must be retrofitted with modern (Pegasus era) FMCs, each one would increase
the cost by between $185K and $1.2M. It is sur mised that the reason, why a great many
older ANS equipable aircraft have not been equipped, is because they lack modern FMCs.
Repeating
the related note from above: The related additional cost would be between $65K+3daysOOS
and $350K+21daysOOS, depending on avionics specifics. FMC retrofit costs were not applied in
this analysis because no FMC equipage data was available.
 b)     If more unequipped but FANS equipable aircraft are discovered that fly the NAT core, of
course each one would add as much as $870K depending on its GPS and SATCOM equipage,
and more depending on its FMC vintage (as per (a) above). However, if a particular aircraft
did not fly the NAT for a week in August 2009, it probably has no great need to fly the NAT at
all.
 c)     The analysis here was confined to the Gander/Shanwick boundary. However, the NAT
2015 data link mandate will impact a much larger area, so many more aircraft could be
affected.

                                           - END -
                                APPENDIX D – TECHNICAL REPORTS


   IBAC Technical Report Summary


    Subject: NAT Operations and Air Traffic Management


    Meeting: North Atlantic (NAT) Air Traffic Management Group 35 th Meeting (ATMG/35)


    IBAC File:


    Reported by: Brian Bowers


Summary: ATM G/35 was held in Paris, France, 8 to 12 March 2010. William Mu ir chaired the meeting and Mrs
Caro le Green fro m the ICAO European and North Atlantic (EUR/NAT) Office, was the Secretary.


A “user‟s conference” is tentatively planned for September 2010 in Reykjavik, Iceland.


The ATMG noted that the NAT Region data link mandates prime intention was to ensure (to the extent possible)
that aircraft will be fitted with the appropriate equipment to participate in NAT Reg ion data lin k services prior to
the deadlines established in the EUR Reg ion data link mandate, thereby eliminating the need for double equipage.


The NAT CNSG has noted the FANS 1/A equipage appears to have stabilized at approximately 40% of the NAT
Region fleet.


A trial implementation of reduced longitudinal separation of 5 minutes between ADS-C equipped aircraft is
planned to commence on 25 May 2010. Init ially, the application of the reduced minimu m will only be applied
between suitably equipped eastbound aircraft in the Shanwick OCA east of 30° West.


The proposal to amend the NAT SUPPs (DOC 7030) to require the insertion of the aircraft registration in Item 18
of the ICA O flight plan form (FPL) had been approved.


IBA C has informed the ATMG of its concerns regarding the NAT Data Link mandate arising fro m the fact that the
majority of business aviation aircraft will not be able to equip in time to meet the deadlines specified in the
mandate due to the lack of FANS 1/A or equivalent equip ment. It was noted by the ATMG that any
implementation plan will need to balance the needs of non -equipped airspace users against those of operators who
had invested in the necessary equipment, while also recognizing that, for some operators, the necessary equipment
does not yet exist.


The Group expressed concerns that an IBAC proposal to grant waivers might delay equipage. The ATMG agreed
that a concept of operations for accommodating non-equipped aircraft should be developed and the United
Kingdom agreed to lead this activity. A d raft concept will be presented to NAT ATMG/36.


Such a concept will be necessary in order to determine whether a waiver system or an exemption system is possible
and if so, what form it should take. IBA C agreed to provide informat ion concerning business aircraft operations
with regards to preferred alt itude bands and routes.


IBA C also requested that consideration be given to establishing criteria for expanding the exclusionary airspace
encompassing the agreed altitude band for the planned reduction of lateral separation to 25 NM. The criteria could,
for examp le, include determin ing the percentage of aircraft that should be eq uipped in order to proceed as intended
after 2013. The Group agreed that this request, along with the foregoing, should be brought to the attention of the
NAT IM G.

The ATMG reviewed a draft concept of operations to support the use of “non-integrated” SATCOM voice systems
in the NAT Region. They supported a proposal that the terminology used should distinguish between “integrated”
and “non-integrated” systems by referring instead to “installed” and “portable” SATCOM voice systems, so as to
clarify which systems were being discussed. The concept will be further developed and presented to NAT
ATMG/ 36.

The ATMG reviewed information concerning the requirements for aircraft certificat ion and crew qualificat ion in
order to be elig ible for ADS-B services in the northern part of the NAT Reg ion. It is not intended to initially
designate airspace where ADS-B services will be provided as being segregated or exclusionary.

The ICA O EUR/ NAT Secretariat has completed the task of migrating the content of the NAT PCO website to the
ICA O EUR/NAT website: www.paris.icao.int. Documentation pertinent to the NAT Region can be accessed by
following the lin ks to Documents and then to NAT Docs.

 A new type of document, the NAT Operations Bulletin (NAT Ops Bullet in), had been creat ed to facilitate the
posting of “third party” documents such as AIC, guidance material for clearance delivery via data link, etc. The
NAT OPS Bulletin Checklist contains a list of all current NAT Operations Bulletins and will be re -issued whenever
a Bu llet in is added or deleted.

The ATMG agreed to reco mmend that NAT ATM G/36 take p lace fro m 20 to 24 September 2010 in Paris, France
and that NAT ATMG/37 take place at IATA Headquarters in Miami, United



Implicati on for Business Aviati on: Business Aviation should remain abreast of new requirements and
availabilities within the NAT Region and adjoin ing interface airspaces.


Note. A “user‟s conference” is tentatively planned for September 2010 in Reykjav ik, Iceland.
Information should be obtained and disseminated as soon as possible.


Note. The NAT SUPPs amend ment to require the insertion of the aircraft registration in Item 18 of the ICAO flight
plan form (FPL) has been approved.


Note. The IBA C concerns regarding the NAT Data Link mandate and the fact that the majority of business aviation
aircraft will not be able to equip in t ime to meet the deadlines specified in the mandate due to the lack of FANS 1/A
or equivalent equipment. the content of the NAT PCO website to the ICAO EUR/ NAT website:
www.paris.icao.int.
Note. IBAC agreed to provide informat ion concerning business aircraft operations with regards to preferred altitude
bands and routes.


Note. It is not intended to initially designate airspace where ADS-B services in the northern part of the NAT Reg ion
will be provided as being segregated or exclusionary for A DS -B services.


Note. The content of the ICAO EUR/NAT website: www.paris.icao.int.




Decisions Required:


In-depth consideration of the NAT areas under discussion is necessary to keep on a par with or ahead of
requirements.


To emphasize the impact on international business aviation of the 2013/2015 datalink mandate in Eu ropean and
NAT airspace in order to develop strategies to mitigate the problems.


To make decisions on the timely acquisition of equipment, degree of training and certification required to meet the
requirements to efficiently continue accessing NAT airspace.


  This report contains material for the sole information of IBAC Members and no guarantee or undertakings are given, or
  should be assumed, as to their accuracy. The content is under the copyright of the author and IBAC, and may not be
  distributed to third parties without specific agreement of the IBAC Director General.
   IBAC Technical Report Summary


    Subject: NAT Operations and Air Traffic Management


    Meeting: North Atl antic (NAT) Communications, Navig ation and Surveillance Group (CNSG/2)


    IBAC File:


    Reported by: Brian B owers


Summary: The CNSG/2 was held fro m 22 to 26 March 2010 in Limerick, Ireland. The Meeting was chaired by
Norm Dimock (Canada) and Elkhan Nah madov fro m the ICAO European and North Atlantic (EUR/ NAT) Office,
was the Secretary.


The CNSG felt that implementation of the new format of the ICAO flight plan (FPL2012) will require some sort of
regionally coordinated effort in the NAT. It was felt that the CNSG could act as a focal point fo r the NAT work.


The Group felt that if a separate NAT website solution in support of the NAT DLMA is to be pursued then
necessary measures would need to be undertaken to ensure uniformity of data to be collected and disseminated. The
efforts to establish such a website will need to be evaluated against expected benefits.


There are still misunderstandings by flight crews of the intent of CPDLC message elements co ntaining the words
AT and BY. The CNSG noted the ATMG and SG concerns that this issue constituted a significant safety issue and
required urgent resolution. The CNSG agreed that issues associated with messages containing the words AT and
BY might best be addressed by a group composed of experts fro m both the CNSG and ATMG as most of the
potential solutions have both technical and operational imp licat ions. The Group agreed to recommend to the IM G
that such an ad-hoc group be formed.


The CNSG was provided with an update on the FANS 1/A over Iridiu m (FOI) pro ject underway by the FAA -
sponsored PARC CW G. In itial statistical data samp les gathered in the course of the FOI data collection provided
promising results but further work is required.


There was a rather significant increase in the FANS 1/A usage (i.e. fro m 40% to 45%) co mpared to the average data
presented at the previous CNSG/1 meeting.


The Group was presented with a working paper urging clarification on certain aspects of the NAT data link
mandate. One issue regarding the 2015 NAT data lin k mandate that stands out as crucial and controversial, is: What
does “aircraft unable to equip in the time frame” really mean?

The handling of aircraft equipped to meet the EUR mandate is particularly problematic. Because the EUR Reg ion
2015 mandate will not exclude those aircraft that have been equipped with FANS 1/A; how can the NAT exclude
EUR Region CPDLC only aircraft?

Another question also needs to be answered - “how will aircraft unable to equip be accommodated” for the 2013
initiat ive. The NAT SPG Conclusion 45/ 10 indicates the entire OTS between FL 350 and FL 400 will require data
lin k equipage in 2013. The CNSG noted that this conclusion should be reconsidered to provide a partial OTS
(optimal tracks only) based on equipage, but not the entire OTS.


Since September 2008, UK NATS have been working with Gu lfstream and Honeywell to develop their
Cert ification F software for CPDLC in the G450/ G550 aircraft. To date no operational issues have been seen with
any of the notified flights utilizing CPDLC. Appro ximately 30 crossings have been recorded. The CNSG noted that
further work was required on performance assessment to be carried out against the GOLD requirements by the
respective States of Registry or the Operator in the framewo rk of the operational authorization process.

The GOLD is reco mmended for adoption by the NAT SPG/ 46 as a replacement for the NAT Data Lin k Gu idance
Material. In the initial period following its adoption, the ad -hoc group will continue to maintain the document with
the view to transferring this function to the ICA O Regional Offices at a later stage.


The Group agreed to recommend to the NAT IMG that the third meeting of the NAT CNSG should be held in
Halifax (Canada) fro m 27 September to 1 October 2010 and the 4th meeting will take place in Paris (France) in
March 2011.



Implicati on for Business Aviati on: Business Aviation should remain abreast of new requirements and
availabilities within the NAT Region and adjoin ing interface airspaces .

Note. The imp lementation of the new format of the ICA O flight plan (FPL2012).

Note. There are still misunderstandings by flight crews of the intent of CPDLC message elements containing the
words “AT and BY”.

Note. The FANS 1/A over Iridiu m (FOI) pro ject underway by the FAA-sponsored PARC CW G.

Note. The increase in the FANS 1/A usage from 40% to 45%.

Note. The imp lementation plans for the 2015 NAT data link mandate and the issues that stand out as crucial and
controversial.

Note. The GOLD will be a replacement for the NAT Data Link Guidance Material.



Decisions Required:


In-depth consideration of the NAT areas under discussion is necessary to keep on a par with or ahead of
requirements.


To emphasize the impact on international business aviation of the 2013/2015 datalink mandate in European and
NAT airspace in order to develop strategies to mitigate the problems.


To make decisions on the timely acquisition of equipment, degree of training and certification required to meet the
requirements to efficiently continue accessing NAT airspace.




  This report contains material for the sole information of IBAC Members and no guarantee or undertakings are
  given, or should be assumed, as to their accuracy. The content is under the copyright of the author and IBAC,
  and may not be distributed to third parties without specific agreement of the IBAC Director General.
APPENDIX E – NBAA Website & IBAC CNS/ATM Advisory Group
                                                APPENDIX F - CNS/ATM AG ACTION LIS T 4




TAS    TASK ID                                                                            WHO             WHEN
K#

5-1    To Review the membership of the Advisory Group and determine if other          All Members       Each Meeting
       interested parties should be invited and encouraged to participate.

5- 2   To identify and discuss the possible disconnects between NextGen and SESAR.    All Members       Each Meeting

5-3    Determine possible presenters for each AG meeting based on venue and           All Members         Ongoing
       information requirements.

5-4    Continue discussion with ICAO concerning the “One Stop Shop” concept and          AG Sect.         Ongoing
       the Geographic Information System (GIS) portal contents for IBAC CNS/ATM
       information.

5-5    Develop a methodology to determine acceptable trans-Atlantic altitude bands   AG Sect with the     Ongoing
       and future projections of the IBAC community Avionics equipage for 2015.       input from All
                                                                                        Members

5-6    Provide input to the continuing development and use of the CNS/ATM portion     All Members         Ongoing
       of the IBAC Website.

5-7    Identify and recommend as necessary AG/IBAC representatives to CNS/ATM         All Members       Each Meeting
       related groups for input/reporting on PBN, NEXTGEN, SESAR, OPLINK
       Panel, RTCA SC214, etc
TAS    TASK ID                                                                                 WHO         WHEN
K#

5-8    Monitor and comment as necessary on the developments of the RCP                      All Members    Ongoing
       implementation plan for the NAT Region which is aiming to mandate ADS-
       C/CPDLC datalink in 2015.

5-9    To address issues which come from the NBAA International Operators                   All Members    Ongoing
       Conference (IOC) concerning specific ICAO States and to develop a table of
       regional issues that the IOC regional experts could address as part of their
       mandate for the Regional reports and provide to the CNS/ATM AG.

5-10   Monitor and report on the development of the contingency procedures for loss         Chairman and   Ongoing
       of data link in one or more of the NAT Oceanic Control Areas (OCA) and the             secretary
       study on the feasibility of reverting to voice procedures in the event of the data
       link failure.

5-11   Investigate the possibility of describing the ICAO amendment process step by           AG Sect.     Ongoing
       step and placing the process on the IBAC or ICAO website (or both).

5-12   Investigate the possibility of following a change/amendment proposal through           AG Sect.     Ongoing
       the ICAO system via the ICAO GIS portal.

5-13   Monitor and report on the status of the use of SATCOM voice for routine ATS            AG Sect      Ongoing
       communications.

5-14   Monitor identified issues related to standardizing nomenclature and                  All Members    Ongoing
       implementation processes associated with ANSP, State Regulator and
       international business aircraft operator interaction. The AG will try to resolve
       identified issues as they are presented to the group.

5-15   The AG may utilize a chat Forum (when necessary) set up within the                   IBAC/NBAA      Ongoing
       CNS/ATM AG portion of the IBAC website.
TAS       TASK ID                                                                               WHO        WHEN
K#

5-16      The AG will monitor the work of the “Radio Technical Commission for                All Members   Ongoing
          Aeronautics (RTCA) Special Committee 214” in relation to their development
          of datalink services and NextGen/SESAR to ensure they are Global and meet
          IBAC‟s requirements.

5-17      The AG will continue to deliberate and try to resolve the issue that information   All Members   Ongoing
          to operators on obtaining information on certification and approvals (such as
          WPR approvals) is not explicitly available to the normal operator.

5-18      Monitor and report on Version 19 of the “NAT Data Link Guidance Material”            AG Sect     Ongoing
          which is to be published during the first half of 2009.

5-19      Monitor and report on the development of procedures to ensure that flight crews      AG Sect     Ongoing
          are provided information related to satellite communication service outages.

5-20   Monitor and report when the finalized draft document of the NAT Operational             AG Sect     Ongoing
       Contingency Plan is available on the ICAO NAT PCO website.

5-21      The CNS/ATM AG 3 agreed that representatives to the working groups should          AG Chairman   Ongoing
          meet by teleconference prior to each new meeting whenever possible.

5-22   Monitor and report on the NAT roadmap.                                                All Members   Ongoing

5-23   Monitor and report on the European Implementing rule on equipage of data link in      All Members   Ongoing
       Europe by 2015.

5-24      Monitor and report on the status of declaring developing systems fully             All Members   Ongoing
          “operational”.
TAS       TASK ID                                                                              WHO            WHEN
K#

5-25   Monitor and report on the timeframe for mandate of ADS-B OUT in Europe              All Members        Ongoing
       presently scheduled for 2015.

5-26   Monitor and report on the CPDLC mandates, above FL285, in Western Europe            All Members        Ongoing
       starting in 2013 and Eastern Europe by 2015.

5-27   Monitor and report on the status of SESAR implementation in Europe scheduled        All Members        Ongoing
       for 2020.

5-28   Monitor and report on the status of the Japanese MCAM concept scheduled for         All Members        Ongoing
       validation and with operational flight tests by 2012.

5-29   Review the input to the CNS/ATM AG Guidance Material as published on the           Secretary and All   Ongoing
       websites and update as necessary.                                                     Members

5-30   All members who are not registered on the CNS/ATM AG portion of the                Secretary and All   Ongoing
       SharePoint website should provide notification to the secretary and then receive      Members
       invitations to join.

5-31   Provide the latest information on news and ideas of interest to the CNS/ATM AG        Secretary        Ongoing
       at each new meeting and post excerpts on the websites between meetings as
       necessary.

5-32   Distribute the venue and timing for the fifth meeting of the CNS/ATM AG when          Secretary         ASAP
       decisions are finalized.
       Update the CNS/ATM Technology Development Roadmap with information on the
5-33                                                                                       All Members        On-going
       ICAO amendments to Annex 6 Parts 1 and 2 reference Flight Data Recorders
       (FDRs) and Cockpit Voice Recorders (CVRs) particularly in relation to datalink
       requirements.
TAS       TASK ID                                                                              WHO         WHEN
K#
       Approach and encourage more of the flight training institutions, representatives
5-34                                                                                          Secretary    Ongoing
       from other OEMs (like Garmin, and Universal Avionics) as well as Embraer to
       participate in the CNS/ATM AG. Remind them of the efficacy of the group and
       explain how important their participation in the group is in order to round out the
       necessary expertise for the AG.

       The CNS/ATM AG will also pursue getting input from “avionics retrofit
5-35                                                                                          Secretary    Ongoing
       companies”. Some of the companies suggested could include but would not be
       limited to Duncan Aviation, Midcoast Aviation, Jet Aviation, Landmark Aviat ion
       and Innovative Solutions and Support.

       Monitor and report on the Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS) and the
5-36                                                                                         All Members   Ongoing
       Terminal Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) changes, particularly in Europe.

       Monitor and report on RNP “special aircraft and aircrew and authorization required
5-37                                                                                          Secretary    Ongoing
       (SAAAR)” approaches for business aviation in the USA.

       The CNS/ATM AG will consider the types of information required in the cockpit
5-38                                                                                         All Members   Ongoing
       and remain in contact with the SWIM group to provide input when the
       development timeline requires participation

       The Strategic Projection of Airspace Requirements and Certification (SPARC)
5-39                                                                                          Secretary    Ongoing
       software tool should not be forgotten. This would be an invaluable tool and should
       continue to be pursued with ICAO.
                              APPENDIX G – NEWS and VIEWS




CNS/ATM News & Views
Wireless Data Delivers

Avionics Magazine

November 12, 2009

from <http://www.aviationtoday.com/av/issue/feature/Wireless-Data-Delivers_36166.html>



Airbus to help China with ATM

Flight Safety Information (Source: Air Transport Intelligence news)

November 18, 2009

"Flight Safety Information" is a free service of:

www.fsinfo.org



Cockpit retrofits - Manufacturers rethink approach to market for major avionics
upgrades

Aviation International News June 1, 2008

November 25, 2009

from <http://www.ainonline.com/news/single-news-page/article/cockpit-retrofits/>



MidEast Bizjet Sales Increase

AVwebBiz Complete Issue: Volume 7,
Number 46

November 25, 2009

from <http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/bizav/1519-full.html#201588>
FAA: CVR/FDR Upgrades Delayed

AVweb Flash CVR/FDR Delays Volume 16, Number 2a
January 11, 2010



from <http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/1547-full.html#201817>



ADS-B Up And Running In The Gulf

AVwebFlash Complete Issue: Volume 16, Number 2b ADS-B in GULF of Mexico

January 14, 2010

from <http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/1549-full.html#201842>



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Maic3IzHSew



First ADS-B based Surveillance Service Operational in the Asia/Pacific Region.
The Fifth South East Asia (SEA) ADS-B Working Group meeting hosted by DGCA
Indonesia was held in Jakarta from 21 to 22 January 2010.

The Fifth South East Asia (SEA) ADS-B Working Group meeting hosted by DGCA
Indonesia was held in Jakarta from 21 to 22 January 2010. The meeting was
informed that the world‟s first nationwide satellite -based air navigation
surveillance system has been put into ope rational use in Australia since end of
December 2009 after the culmination of years of planning, hard work and
commitment by the staff of Airservices Australia and CASA.

The ADS-B Upper Airspace Project, which delivers radar- like coverage across the
whole Australian continent for the first time ever, is supported by 28 Automatic
Dependent Surveillance Broadcast (ADS-B) ground stations and a new digital
communications network using the latest state-of-the-art technology

The accuracy of the resulting information displayed on controllers‟ screens has
allowed separation standards to be reduced from the previous procedural standard of
30 nautical miles to the radar standard of five nautical miles for aircraft flight at and
above                                                                             FL290.

ADS-B has been enthusiastically welcomed by controllers, pilots and the aviation
industry.
The immediate benefits have included significant improvement in flow management,
less restrictive weather diversions, quicker access to preferred routes, less position
reporting, a reduced cockpit workload and improved situational awareness.

The meeting congratulated Australia for commissioning the Upper Airspace Project
which indicates significant milestone for ADS-B implementation that has been
achieved. It will motivate other States for early implementation.

The SEA ADS-B Working Group is working together to progress ADS-B data
sharing and enhance Pilot and Controller Direct (DCPC) VHF voice communication
capability for the area crossing FIR boundary to increase air navigation safety, flight
efficiency and capacity along major air traffic routes in the region.

http://www.icao.or.th/news.htm
                  APPENDIX H – NAV CANADA and IOC Collated Data
July 2007

35847 total flights - 2350 IGA (6.5%)

                                    #         FL       %
                                    197       270       8.4
                                     34       280       1.4
                                      9       290       0.4
                                     12       300       0.5
                                      9       310       0.4
                                     11       320       0.5
                                     27       330       1.2
                                     57       340       2.4
                                    072       350       3.1
                                    142       360       6.0
                                    193       370       8.2
                                    160       380       6.8
                                    184       390       7.8
                                    352       400      15.0
                                    512       410      21.8
                                    276       430      11.8
                                    110       450       4.7
                                      2       470        .1


July 2009 1352 Flights vs 2350 Flights July 2007. A difference of 1000 flights less.

85.2% FL350 – FL450 same 2007/2009 stats.

77.4% between FL360 and FL430.

34.3% FL340 – FL390

                                 2009 NAV CANADA Stats

Eastbound on OTS 402 Flights = 2.7%

Westbound on OTS 382 Flights = 2.5%

Total                                5.2% E&W on OTS

Total ac FL370-FL400 = 4291. - 2726 Different airframes

                     1209 AC        = 28%           at FL 370
                     622 AC         = 14.5%         at FL 380      63.5%
                     909 AC         = 21%           at FL 390
                     1551 AC        = 36%           At FL 400
     EASTBOUND          WESTBOUND
    450     17         450      2
    440                440
    430      7         430     35
    420                420
    410     79         410     10
    400      9         400     59
    390     25         390     17
    380     10         380     28
    370     24         370      7
    360      7         360     23
    350     15         350      3
    340      1         340      7
    330      3         330
    320      1         320      2
    310                310
    300                300
    290                290




                 TRACKS       STEP CLIMB

EASTBOUND         42                67

WESTBOUND         39                72
GLF4         270   2            GLF5         280   1      F900         270    2       CL60         270   4     E190         270   13    GLEX         270   1
             280   1                         310   1                   280    2                    280   8                  280   2                  340   1
             320   1                         340   2                   290    2                    290   15                 290   28                 350   1
             330   3                         350   5                   310    4                    300   4                  300   10                 370   4
             340   4                         360   5                   320    4                    310   9                  310   96                 380   5
             350   6                         370   3                   330    11                   320   25                 320   8                  390   22
             360   9                         380   13                  340    23                   330   35                 330   76                 400   128
             370   30                        390   62                  350    48                   340   75                 340   34                 410   305
             380   76                        400   314                 360    83                   350   132                350   140                420   1
             390   217                       410   624                 370    140                  360   192                360   59                 430   274
             400   626                       420   2                   380    209                  370   206                370   251                450   81
             410   642                       430   642                 390    197                  380   128                380   46                 470   8
             430   310                       450   265                 400    160                  390   78                 390   172   GLEX Total         831
             450   48                        470   19                  410    88                   400   31                 400   6
GLF4 Total               1975                480   1                   430    30                   410   25                 410   6
                                             490   1      F900 Total          1003                 430   1     E190 Total         947
                                GLF5 Total         1960                               CL60 Total         968


                                E45X         270   28                                 E135         270   27    E170         270   8     LJ35         270   5
                                             280   20                                              280   25                 280   9                  280   9
                                             290   14                                              290   4                  290   17                 290   9
                                             300   1                                               300   1                  300   1                  300   9
                                             310   32                                              310   7                  310   35                 310   2
                                             320   3                                               320   3                  320   5                  320   2
                                             330   69                                              330   31                 330   88                 330   5
                                             340   19                                              340   8                  340   25                 340   21
                                             350   176                                             350   36                 350   133                350   32
                                             360   139                                             360   52                 360   27                 360   45
                                             370   170                                             370   194                370   121                370   48
                                E45X Total         671                                             380   27                 380   1                  380   52
                                                                                                   390   25                 390   7                  390   37
                                                                                                   400   32                 410   1                  400   41
                                                                                                   410   13    E170 Total         478                410   18
                                                                                      E135 Total         485                                         430   4
                                                                                                                                        LJ35 Total         339


F2TH         310   1                                      C750         330    2       FA7X         280   1     FA50         270   4     CL30         280   5
             330   2                                                   340    1                    340   1                  280   2                  310   2
             340   3                                                   350    2                    350   3                  290   2                  320   1
             350   2                                                   360    1                    360   4                  300   2                  330   2
             360   5                                                   380    7                    370   5                  310   1                  350   4
             370   8                                                   390    12                   380   16                 320   1                  360   1
             380   9                                                   400    24                   390   26                 330   7                  370   1
             390   25                                                  410    50                   400   45                 340   16                 390   5
             400   82                                                  430    65                   410   43                 350   16                 400   31
             410   114                                                 450    19                   430   27                 360   17                 410   72
             430   67                                                  470    1                    450   4                  370   28                 420   1
             440   1                                      C750 Total          184                  470   4                  380   33                 430   87
             450   8                                                                  FA7X Total         179                390   24                 450   31
             470   1                                                                                                        400   31    CL30 Total         243
F2TH Total         328                                                                                                      410   26
                                                                                                                            430   6
                                                                                                               FA50 Total         216



                                                                             US DATA Abbrevi ated 1
                                                                                                                                                                            Appendix - I

                                                        CNS/ATM TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT ROADMAP

Should be used in conjunction with the IBAC CNS /ATM AG Guidance Material.

                                                                                                                                                                Ver. 02 - 13/04/2010

                                  EUR/NAT                            APAC                  W ACAF               NACC                    SAM                  M ID                ESAF
                           Datalink forward fit               CPDLC is in use in      CPDLC is being                           Brazil and Chile   Adequate number of
Communications
                           compliance for all new             the APAC region in      implemented in                           using CPDLC.       MID carrier’s fleet are
                 CPDLC     aircraft operating above           FIRs (e.g. Singapore,   WACAF States.                                               ready.
                           FL285 becomes compulsory           Australia, New                                                                      Plans are in some MID
                           in Europe in 2011 to assist in     Zealand, Japan,                                                                     States.
                           reducing frequency                 India, China,                                                                       Test on FANS will be
                           congestion.                        Myanmar, Etc.)                                                                      conducted specially
                                                                                                                                                  (Egypt, Saudi Arabia,
                           Flights shall be fitted with and                                                                                       Iran)
                           operate CPDLC equipment
                           from Feb. 2013, on specified
                           tracks and flight levels within
                           the OTS and from Feb. 2015,
                           in specified portions of NAT
                           MNPS Airspace.
                           LINK TO NAT SPG 45 see
                           Conclusions 45/9,10,&11
                    ATN    FANS aircraft w/airworthiness                                               ATN for use in USA by
                           certificate issued prior to Jan                                             2016.
                           1, 2014 are exempt from DLS
                           IR for their useful life.
                           Aircraft w/o ops approval are
                           not exempt.
                           (LINK TO EC Implementing
                           Rule No. 29/   2009 see Art. 3
                           Para’s . 1 - 5)
                EUR/NAT                         APAC                  W ACAF                    NACC                      SAM                      M ID       ESAF
  VDL2   DLS IR mandated above                                                         VDL2 will be utilized         .
         FL285 in ECAC airspace for                                                    more often as more
         aircraft delivered after 2011                                                 aircraft become
         and by 2015 for retrofit.                                                     equipped with digital
         VDL2 is the baseline                                                          ACARS
         technology but other
         technology may be
         acceptable if demonstrated
         compliance w/standards and
         has regulatory acceptability.
         (LINK TO EC Implementing
         Rule No. 29/   2009 see Art. 3
         Para’s . 1 - 5)

  VDL3                                                                                 VDL Mode 3 with data
                                                                                       dates is tentative. In
                                                                                       the US in the
                                                                                       high/super-high en
                                                                                       route structure

  VDL4


SATCOM   Satellite voice communications (SATCOM) may some day enable Direct Controller Pilot Communications (DCPC) by voice in oceanic and remote airspace.
                          EUR/NAT                   APAC   W ACAF             NACC                     SAM                       M ID                ESAF
Navigation         PRNAV (RNAV1) for enroute                        RNAV above FL180 in        RNAV and RNP10 is       RNAV 5 (formally RNP     RNAV and
                   2010 and beyond in Europe.                       USA by 2015 and all        being used in           5) already implemented   RNP10 is being
             RNP   RNAV used for some arrivals                      altitudes in continental   Oceanic sectors of      en-route                 used in
                   and departures since 2007.                       USA by 2020.               SAM States of                                    Oceanic
                   Limited RNP4 operations in                       RNP2 at/and above          Argentina, Brazil and                            sectors of
                   the WATRS starting 2011.                         FL290 in USA by 2015.      Uruguay.                                         Angola and
                                                                                                                                                South Africa
                   RNP10 or better mandatory                        RNP for busy enroute
                   from 2011 in WATRS Plus                          and terminal airspace
                   airspace.                                        by 2020.
                   Introduce 25 NM lateral
                   separation by implementing
                   ½ degree spacing between
                   the two core tracks, FL350 to
                   FL400 inclusive – 2012.
                   Expand the introduction of 25
                   NM lateral separation by
                   implementing ½ degree
                   spacing through the entire
                   NAT Organised Track System
                   (OTS), FL350 to FL400 – 2013
                   Introduce 25 NM lateral
                   separation throughout the
                   entire NAT Region, including
                   for converging and
                   intersecting track situations,
                   between FL350 to FL400 -
                   2015
                   RNP distance-based
                   longitudinal separation
                   implemented in the NAT
                   between F285 and F415 in
                   2015.
                              EUR/NAT                             APAC          W ACAF   NACC   SAM             M ID           ESAF
                RNP    A trial implementation of
                       reduced longitudinal
                       separation of 5 minutes
                       between ADS-C equipped
                       aircraft is planned to
                       commence on 25 May 2010.
                       Initially, the application of the
                       reduced minimum will be
                       applied only between
                       eastbound aircraft in the
                       Shanwick OCA east of 30°
                       West.
                       (LINK TO ATMG/35 Para. 3.2
                       and LINK TO NAT SPG 45 see
                       Conclusions 45/9)
                PBN    Currently there is no mandate                                                  MID PBN
                       in the European Union for P-                                                   Implementation targets
                       RNAV, and conventional (non-                                                   for short (2008-2012)
                       RNAV) terminal area                                                            and medium (2013-16)
                       procedures will continue to                                                    terms attached.
                       be provided for the near
                       future.

Surveillance           Flights shall be fitted with and    ADD ADS-C
                       operate ADS-C equipment             ADS-C is in use in
               ADS-C   from Feb.2013, on specified         the APAC region in
                       tracks and on specified flight      FIRs.
                       levels within the OTS and
                       from Feb. 2015, in specified
                       portions NAT MNPS Airspace.
                       LINK TO NAT SPG 45 see
                       Conclusions 45/9,10,&11

               ADS-B   Eurocontrol will have some
                       “ADS-B in” by 2011.
                  IN
                       “ADS-B in” to be mandated in
                       the NAT in 2025.
                            EUR/NAT                            APAC            W ACAF            NACC                      SAM                       M ID             ESAF
                                                        The world’s first
             ADS-B   Trials from Southern                                               Initial implementation      ADS-B is being        ADS-B is being
                     Greenland to and including        nationwide satellite-            in Canada - Hudson Bay      implemented in        implemented in UAE it
              OUT    Canadian east coast in 2010.      based air navigation             Basin area in Jan 2009.     some SAM FIRs (e.g.   is in test phase and will
                                                       surveillance system                                          Brazil)               used for operation as of
                     Eurocontrol is in the process     has been put into                The USA implemented
                     of mandating ADS-B out.                                            ADS-B over the Gulf of                            June 2009
                                                       operational use in
                     The likely dates are 2015 to      Australia since end              Mexico in 2010 and                                Iran and Saudi Arabia
                     update current aircraft and       of December 2009.                intends to have                                   are conducting ADS-B
                     2012 for new aircraft, with a      Being implemented               nationwide ADS-B                                  testing
                     couple of years grace for         in New Zealand,                  coverage by 2013 and
                     aircraft retiring from service.   Japan Oceanic,                   full mandatory
                                                       Indonesia, Etc.                  implementation by
                                                                                        2020.
ATM



Other                To be added based on                                               All aircraft 11+ seats,
                     amendments to Annex 6                                              CVRs must record last
              CVR    Parts 1 and 2 re FDRs and                                          two hours of cockpit
                     CVRs                                                               audio, have an
                                                                                        independent backup
                                                                                        power source to allow
                                                                                        continued recording for
                                                                                        nine to 11 minutes if all
                                                                                        aircraft power sources
                                                                                        are lost or interrupted,
                                                                                        and must use solid-
                                                                                        state technology. FDRs
                                                                                        must retain the last 25
                                                                                        hours of recorded
                                                                                        information.
                     See MID REGION PBN IMPLEMENTATION TARGETS next

                     Nat Regional Supplementary Procedures Doc 7030
References
                              MID REGION PB N IMPLEMENTATION TARGETS



                                              S HORT TERM (2008-2012)

                      Airspace                                         Navigation Specification

     En-route – Oceanic                            RNAV-10

     En-route - Remote continental                 RNAV-10

     En-route – Continental                        RNAV-5, RNAV-1

     En-route - Local / Domestic                   RNAV-5, RNAV-1

     TM A – Arrival                                RNAV-1 in surveillance environment and with adequate navigation
                                                   infrastructure. Basic RNP-1 in non-surveillance environment

     TM A – Departure                              RNAV-1 in surveillance environment and with adequate navigation
                                                   infrastructure. Basic RNP-1 in non- surveillance environment

     Approach                                      RNP APCH with Baro-VNAV in most possible airports;

                                                   RNP AR APCH in airport where there are obvious operational
                                                   benefits.




     Implementation Targets




1.    RNP APCH (with Baro-VNAV) in 30% of instrument runways by 2010 and 50% by 2012 and priority should be given
      to airports with most significant operational benefits

2.    RNAV-1 SIDs/STARs for 30% of international airports by 2010 and 50% by 2012 and priority should be given to
      airports with RNP Approach

3.    RNP-5 and B-RNAV which is implemented in M ID Region to be redefined as per ICAO PBN terminology by 2009
      (M IDANPIRG/11), full implementation of PBN by 2012 for continental en-route.


                                              MEDIUM TER M (2013-2016)

                      Airspace                              Navigation Specification (preferred/acceptable)

     En-route – Oceanic                            Nil

     En-route - Remote continental                 Nil

     En-route – Continental                        RNAV-1, RNAV-5

     En-route - Local / Domestic                   RNAV-1 , RNAV-5
     TM A – (Arrival, Departure)                    RNAV-1 or RNP-1 application




     Approach                                       RNP APCH (with Baro-VNAV) and APV Expansion of RNP AR
                                                    APCH where there are operational benefits Introduction of landing
                                                    capability using GNSS and its augmentations


     Implementation Targets




1.   RNP APCH with Baro-VNAV or APV in 100% of instrument runways by 2016

2.   RNAV-1 or RNP-1 SID/STAR for 100% of international airports by 2016

3.   RNAV-1 or Basic RNP-1 SID/STAR at busy domestic airports where there are operational benefits

4.   Implementation additional RNAV/RNP routes
                                     APPENDIX J – PBN POLICY


                        IBAC Policies Series 30 – Technical Policies



Policy 30-12


    Subject: Performance-based Navigation (PBN)


Approved: May 6, 1999
Revised: December 15, 2001
Revised: XXXXXX, 2010




    I.   Need for Policy



    The traditional method used by ICAO to establish aircraft navigation performance was
    to prescribe the mandatory carriage of certain airborne navigation equipment. This
    method constrained the application of advanced navigation systems, including
    satellite navigation systems, and limited operators’ choice and flexibility to select the
    most operationally beneficial and cost effective navigation system(s).



    Annex 6 provisions have been amended to incorporate Performance-Based
    Navigation (PBN) 12, thereby obviating the need to prescribe or mandate the use of a
    specific navigation system.



    The related Annex 6 provisions are complemented by ICAO Doc.          9613,
    Performance-based Navigation Manual which provides information and guidance
    concerning the implementation and operational approval processes.


1
  PBN Defin ition “Area navigation based on performance requirements for aircraft operating along an ATS
route, or on an instrument approach procedure or in designated airsp ace.”
“Note: Performance requirements are exp ressed in navigation specifications (RNA V specifications, RNP
specifications ) in terms of accuracy, integrity, continuity, availability and functionality needed for the
proposed operation in the context of the particu lar airspace concept.”
2
  Ed Note: The former RNP concept has been subsumed by PBN.
PBN implementation is now in progress.




II.   Policy



IBAC supports the application of PBN.



Implementation of a prescribed PBN type/value requires an obligation by a State(s)

to provide the facilities and/or services necessary to enable users to achieve the
required performance.



IBAC requires that planning for the implementation of a prescribed PBN type provide
sufficient lead time for aircraft and equipment manufacturers, certification authorities
and aircraft operators to certificate and retrofit aircraft and obtain operational
approvals to meet the specified deadlines.



Harmonization of Approval Requirements and Processes



Annex Parts I and II require that an aircraft be authorized by the State of
Registry/Operator, respectively for such operations.



For RNP AR APCH operations, ICAO Doc. 9613 requires that the operator be
authorized by the State in whose airspace the PBN operation will take place and that
the flight crew has undergone specific training requirements.



The prior experience of operators with the implementation, approval processes and
related administrative procedures for RNAV & RNP revealed significant
inconsistencies and confusion. Examples included; non-harmonized terminology at a
national &/or regional level, national approval processes based on national vice
international requirements, inconsistencies in the approach to the authorization
processes and the nature of the documentation signify the granting of authorization.
  Operators expected that, with the advent of PBN, many of the inconsistencies would
  be resolved and that a clear and simplified authorization process would emerge. Early
  experience with the transition to PBN indicates that unfortunately this may not yet be
  the case. Issues remain with



   -      various        States        and        various        ICAO          Regions,


   -      various RNAV & RNP types, viz RNP 10, RNP 5 (Basic RNAV), RNP 4 etc,


   -      some States’ Flight Standards organizations involved in aircraft approvals
          and operator authorizations.



  IBAC therefore urges that       ICAO strengthens efforts to press States to:


   -      rationalize and establish consistency in PBN implementation in all
          States/Regions,       i.e.,      on      a      global      basis,


   -      harmonize their processes for aircraft approval and operator authorization,
          (particularly as applicable to international general aviation i.e. those
          operations requiring no AOC), including adherence to related PBN
          terminology and encourage uniform adherence thereto and ensure that
          authorizations are responsive to international requirements and that
          appropriate documentation is provided to operators.



   -      streamline the processes for maintaining navigation dat abase integrity for AR
          APCH operations which are laborious, costly and burdensome, especially for
          small operators.




Source of Policy: (1) Original, Governing Board, Montreal, May 6-7,1999
                  (2) Revised, Governing Board, New Orleans December 15,
2001
                  (3) Revised, Governing Board, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

								
To top