Meeting Report ACP WG-F/25
|[pic] | |Report |
| |International Civil Aviation Organization |14 October 2011 |
| | | |
| |REPORT | |
| | | |
AERONAUTICAL COMMUNICATIONS PANEL (ACP)
TWENTY FIFTH MEETING OF WORKING GROUP F
Dakar, Senegal 10 – 14 October 2011
REPORT
1. Introduction
1.1 The meeting was preceded by a Regional Spectrum Workshop in preparation for ITU WRC-12 (6-7 October 2011). The Director of the WACAF regional office, Mr Mam Sait Jallow formally opened both the workshop and the meeting and Mr. Steve Mitchell, the Rapporteur of Working Group F expressed the gratitude of the group to the ICAO regional office for arranging the meeting facilities and for being given the chance to hold WG-F in Dakar. Mr Loftur Jonasson from the ICAO Secretariat, Montreal, assisted by Mr Francois Salambanga and Mr Prosper Zo’o-Minto’o, Regional Officers CNS in the ICAO WACAF and ESAF offices, acted as the Secretary of the meeting. The presentations made in the Regional Spectrum Workshop can be found as MIS1-MIS12 on the ACP WG-F webpage for this meeting.
1.2 After the opening of the meeting the agenda was approved by the group. The agenda is contained in Appendix A
1.3 The list of papers submitted for consideration by Working Group F is contained in Appendix B. The list of participants is in Appendix C.
2. Agenda Item 2 – Review, update and development of the ICAO Frequency
Spectrum Handbook
Under this agenda item and in line with the recent decision of the ACP Working Group of the Whole, the meeting considered changes to Annex 10 Volume V as well as the Frequency Spectrum Handbook.
2.1 Proposals for Annex 10 Volume V
2.1.1 As a consequence of work initiated through WG-F on the development of volume II of the Frequency Spectrum Handbook, WP 7 provided details of proposals to update Annex 10 Volume V Chapter 4. Since the proposals had been considered by one of the correspondence groups set up by WG-F at their last meeting held in Paris, comments had been received on the proposals which were contained in WP8 and WP17. All three papers were presented and considered by the meeting with agreement being reached on the most appropriate proposals to go forward as an amendment to Annex 10 Volume V Chapter 4. The agreed proposal can be found as Appendix D.
2.1.2 The meeting also agreed that since the guidance material contained in Attachment A of Annex 10 Volume V Chapter 4 will also be contained in the Frequency Spectrum Handbook then Attachment A should be deleted. This will have the advantage that material will only be contained in one location and that any updates to material can take place outside of the formal SARP update process. The meeting did however consider the comments that had been received in WP17 on the original proposed attachment as these needed to be addressed before being incorporated within the handbook. The comments associated with Attachment A can be found as Appendix I of this report.
2.2 Update of Frequency Spectrum Handbook
2.2.1 The correspondence group mentioned in section 2.1 above also considered the development of volume II of the Frequency Spectrum Handbook. WP9 provided details of the proposals for the development of the handbook while comments were made in WP17. Both papers were presented and considered by the meeting and although there are some areas that need to be addressed, the meeting in general agreed that the material found in Appendix E should be used for the development of volume II of the handbook.
2.2.2 In order that the work in developing volume II of the handbook should continue, the meeting agreed that the correspondence group should continue until the end of November 2011in order to agree the details of the contents from which the rapporteur of the correspondence group will develop a fuller proposal for volume II. It is expected that, while the new draft volume II will be fairly mature at this time, there will still be an opportunity for further review of the material during the next two meetings of WG-F in 2012. Edition 6 of the handbook, including the new volume II will be submitted for publication by end of 2012. This also ensures that the new material contained in volume will be available in time for the related update to Annex 10 Volume V Chapter 4.
3. Agenda item 3 – Development of material for ITU-R meetings
3.1 WRC-12 Agenda Item 1.7
3.1.1 The meeting considered WP12 as well as outcomes of the CPM report, ITU-R WP 4C and regional preparatory groups relating to Agenda Item 1.7 contained in IP3-6. It was noted by the meeting that the ICAO position on this agenda item is “to support further regulatory provisions to strengthen AMS(R)S access to the bands 1 545 - 1 555 MHz and 1 646.5 -1 656.5 MHz including, if required, changes to No. 5.357A, No. 5.362A and Resolution 222”. As a direct consequence of the Position it was stated during the ensuing discussion that ICAO supports method B of the CPM report to WRC-12.
3.1.2 The meeting was made aware that the ongoing work in regional preparatory groups indicates that modifications will be discussed at WRC-12 and in particular the role of ICAO in the future process. It was the view of the meeting that the role of ICAO shall be limited to provide validated AMS(R)S communications traffic data which could be used in the calculation of the AMS(R)S spectrum requirements by using the ITU-R methodology in development in ITU-R WP4C. This AMS(R)S communications traffic data could be defined by a special group organized by ICAO. Since the work in this area is continuing the meeting agreed that the guidelines contained in Appendix F would be useful for member States in their work towards WRC-12 Agenda Item 1.7.
3.1.3 The meeting also agreed to continue the correspondence group for further development of ITU-R Recommendation for the determination of AMS(R)S spectrum requirements to be carried out in next study period .
3.2 WRC-12 5GHz allocation
3.2.1 WP2 highlighted some of the issues associated with possible allocations being made in the frequency band 5030-5091 MHz. The ICAO Position for WRC-12 on Agenda Item 1.3 already identifies that there may be a need to consider the ITU Radio Regulation co-ordination process that needs to be associated with this frequency band and in the ensuing discussion within the meeting, it was agreed some guidance material would be useful of this issue for those involved in the WRC. The guidance information developed and agreed within the meeting can be found as Appendix G to this report.
3.3 ITU-R Recommendation M.1841
3.3.1 WP3 presented details on proposed changes that are to be introduced in to the ITU-R on the modification on ITU-R Recommendation M.1841. It was explained that this recommendation addresses the compatibility between FM broadcast services and GBAS. The recommendation was developed a few years ago however an error had been identified with the coverage diagram of GBAS. The aim of the contribution was therefore to rectify this error and include and formula related to the lower edge of the GBAS coverage. It was further explained that this approach had already been considered and agreed within the NSP. The meeting agreed with the proposal and participants were encouraged to support to proposal within the ITU-R while also considering any other changes that might be necessary to the recommendation.
3.4 Radio altimeters
3.4.1 WP5 contained details on the use of radio altimeters in Ground Proximity Warning Systems (GPWS) and Terrain Avoidance Warning Systems (TAWS). In the presentation of the paper it was stated that the paper is complimentary to WP9 of the March 2011 of ACP WG-F and would form a contribution to the next meeting of ITU-R Working Party 5B. During the discussion at least one editorial problem was identified and it was also stated that there may be an issue with the terms GPWS and TAWS which may have different meanings within aviation and therefore care should be taken over the use of these acronyms. Since the author of the paper was not present at the meeting it was agreed that comments would be collected until the end of the meeting and then forwarded to him.
3.4.2 WP6 provided details of the draft recommendation under development within the ITU-R on radio altimeters. The meeting was reminded that some of material within the document had previously been discussed within WG-F and the aim of bringing WP6 to the meeting was to encourage participants to contribute to the development of the recommendation and in particular details of equipment information. It was agreed that all comments on WP6 should be sent to Eric Allaix no later than the 24 October 2011 in order that dates could be met for any contribution to ITU-R Working Party 5B in November.
3.4.3 IP7 was presented for information and contained details a number of false readings that had been experienced on certain Israeli civil aircraft. The false readings appeared to be caused by interference and when a radar with a centre frequency of approximately 3100 MHz was radiating within the vicinity of the aircraft. Data collection and analysis is ongoing but it is hoped that this can be made available at a future date.
3.5 WRC-12 Agenda Item 1.3
3.5.1 Details of a new project relating to UAS that is being undertaken by NASA were presented in WP13. It was highlighted to the meeting that one particular sub project was looking at the control and non-payload communications of which a number of frequency bands had been identified. One of the frequency bands identified for terrestrial use, 960-1164 MHz, generated considerable discussion particularly with regards to the development of LDACS. In the ensuing discussion issues were raised as to whether LDACS could potentially be used for the control function or whether the frequency band should be considered for UAS particularly since LDACS was still under development. It was made clear that the project is only just getting underway , is a research project of 5 years duration and that no decision has been made on what frequency bands will finally be agreed.
4. Agenda Item 4 – Development of material for regional telecommunication
organization meetings
There were no contributions for this agenda item.
5. Agenda Item 5 - Interference from non-aeronautical sources
5.1 WP10 provided details of the ongoing work within France, for information, on compatibility between primary radars operating in the frequency band 2.7-2.9 GHz and the mobile service operating below 2.69 GHz. During the presentation WG-F were reminded that the two main areas of concern for interference into the radar relate to the out of band rejection ability of the radar and the unwanted emissions into the 2.7-2.9 GHz from the mobile service. The group was also advised that the equipment being operated for mobile service providers produced lower emission levels at the input to the radar that could contribute to maintaining radar services however the service providers would not like to see the performance standards tightened. It was emphasised that the key point of this ongoing work is to maintain radar performance.
5.2 IP8 contained an update to the activities that are being undertaken in the UK with regards to the protection of radar services in the frequency band 2.7-2.9 GHz. During the presentation it was stated that there was good co-operation occurring between States within Europe where this problem has been identified. In the ensuing discussion a number of issues were raised a majority of which, had been considered at WG-F meetings.
6. Agenda Item 6 – Any Other Business
6.1 NSP SSG report
6.1.1 IP1 was presented by the rapporteur of the ICAO Navigation Systems Panel Spectrum Sub Group (NSP SSG) and contained a copy of the latest report of that group. During the presentation a number of issues were highlighted to the meeting and in particular the issue of AM(R)S compatibility with GBAS. It was further stated that WP15 to this meeting addressed this particular topic and was later considered under this agenda item (See section 6.5). WG-F was also advised that the next meeting of the NSP SSG had been postponed until April 2012.
6.2 LDACS datalinks
6.2.1 A paper previously presented at the recent ACP Working Group of the Whole (WGW) was presented as WP4. The paper addressed the need to continue studies on both LDACS options before the most appropriate option could be selected. The meeting noted the work that was ongoing in Europe and during the ensuing discussion it was stated that there is no need to commit to a particular option at this time. There were also views expressed that there was only one real option and that at least one option will need to be chosen. The meeting was reminded however that in order for any LDACS option to go through the SARP process, there needed to be global support for LDACS at a future date. In order to provide some clarity on the thoughts within Europe it was agreed that further information from SESAR would be useful. This information is provided in Appendix H to this report.
6.3 VDL4 signalling channels
6.3.1 WP11 provided details on a proposal to include two VDL4 signalling channels in Annex 10 Volume V Chapter 4. It was explained that in order to meet the integrity requirements for VDL4, frequency diversity was required with as much separation as possible and that there was a need to make these available globally. In the ensuing discussion there were a number of participants that stated that this was not necessary given the limited deployment foreseen for the system and therefore it was not efficient to reserve frequencies on a global basis. It was highlighted that the signalling channels only need to be made available in an area where VDL4 is deployed and that if there is no use then the frequencies could be used for other services. The meeting agreed that some information needed to be captured within Annex 10 Volume V on the signalling channels and the meeting were able to agree on text that can be found on the ACP WG-F webpage for this meeting as a revision to WP11.
6.4 Vehicle Health Management
6.4.1 WP14 provided an update on the ongoing work by NASA on Vehicle Health Management (VHM) communications. This particular paper addressed the off-board needs on the airport surface and presented details of the download requirements that are likely to be necessary for the system. It was further explained that the data is considered as safety critical and that one system that was being considered for downloading the information is AeroMACS. In the resulting discussion on this paper the questions related more to the use of AeroMACS and in particular whether the system could be used at 15 GHz. It was stated that Wimax has a limitation on the maximum frequency that could be used and that it was believed to around 11 GHz. With the deployment of systems such as (VHM) in the future, the meeting noted that there may be a need to revisit the spectrum available for the airport surface communications at a future ITU WRC.
6.5 VHF COM/GBAS compatibility
6.5.1 WP 15 presented details on the possible use of SINAD in determining interference thresholds between GBAS and VHF communications with an aim to include compatibility thresholds in Annex 10. Although the meeting was not in a position to make a positive or negative statement on the use of SINAD at this time they were able to suggest a number of sources of information on testing that had been considered within the ACP and its predecessor the AMCP. One area that was clear however was the difficulty in determining the thresholds using aural tests as this was subjective. The meeting did believe that providing the cross section of people involved in any aural tests was diverse and large enough then there was no need for an international group to be established. The meeting was also made aware that similar types of tests may provide some help in determining interference thresholds and these related to the effect of:
1. VDL3 on DSB AM
2. VDL4 on DSB AM
3. DSB AM against DSB AM
These tests had been made available to previous working groups of the ACP and its predecessor AMCP.
6.6 AFI/FMG information
6.6.1 WP16 provided details of AFI/FMG activities and preparation for WRC-12. One of the particular problems highlighted was the interference that is starting to occur to C band VSAT operations from mobile services. It was explained that the use of VSAT in the AFI region was substantial being used for both Aeronautical Fixed Service (AFTN/ATS-DS) provision and for Aeronautical Mobile Service (VHF extended range) due to poor availability of other means such as landlines. In the discussion on this topic the meeting considered how best to tackle this issue and although some radio regulatory method may provide an option it was realised that this would not be achieved at the next WRC in 2012. The meeting agreed to form a small correspondence group to look at the options and in particular to see whether it would be possible to develop a proposal for a future WRC that could presented to the ATU which meets in early November in Geneva. The technical officers of both the Dakar and Nairobi ICAO regional offices agreed to act jointly as rapporteurs for this group and participants were encouraged to assist in this work.
6.7 Aeronautical spectrum utilisation
6.7.1 WP18 was presented to the meeting for information and contained the output from SESAR on spectrum utilisation. During its introduction it was stated that the reason for making the material available was that since it contained a repository of useful information then participants to the meeting may find it useful. Also a presentation was made of the structure of the sections which contain details of frequency allocations on a band by band basis. The Secretary of the meeting requested whether this information could be made available to the ICAO regional offices and whether some parts could be used in the development of the spectrum handbook. The presenters will confirm whether there is a problem with this request outside of the meeting.
6.7.2 In addition, the meeting was made aware that it is expected that an updated version of the document will be made available in the near future once comments had been received from those involved in its review.
6.8 VHF communications system of Japan
6.8.1 IP2 provided details on the plan to introduce 8.33 kHz channel spacing for VHF communications within Japan. It was stated during the presentation that due to frequency congestion within Japan there was now a need to introduce 8.33 kHz spacing for company frequencies while maintaining 25 kHz spacing for ATC use from approximately March 2012 and that any feedback on 8.33 kHz implementation would be appreciated. In the resulting discussion an offer was made to provide details of a contact in the Eurocontrol 8.33 kHz programme that may be able to provide some useful information and also participants to the meeting with experience of implementing 8.33 kHz were encouraged to provide any information that may have on implementation.
6.8.2 Additionally, the meeting was reminded that any implementation of 8.33 kHz that affects international ATC services requires regional agreement before implementation.
6.9 Administrative Incentive Pricing
6.9.1 IP9 provided an update on where the UK is regarding the implementation of Administrative Incentive Pricing (AIP) for frequencies used for aeronautical services. It was explained that currently AIP had only been set for VHF communications frequency band and that it is not clear how other frequency bands will be addressed in the future. In the resulting discussion there were general comments about the cost to airlines and the increased costs to airlines should other States introduce AIP however this is only something the group can monitor.
6.10 Spectrum release
6.10.1 Details of the proposal to release 500 MHz of spectrum for mobile broadband use in the UK were contained in IP10. During the presentation a number of potential frequency bands were mentioned as being identified although only a limited number were of direct interest to aviation. The group were also reminded that a presentation had been made at the spectrum workshop (MIS11) of a similar proposal in the USA although the frequency bands were not necessarily the same and that other States are considering similar proposals. The meeting agreed to continue to monitor developments in this area.
6.11 Propagation loss in GBAS frequency co-ordination and IF77
6.11.1 IP11 and IP12 were presented at the same time and related to frequency planning/coverage predictions using the IF77 propagation model. The first issue raised was the use of the curves within ITU-R Recommendation P.528 (IF77 is directly related to this recommendation) and the difficulties in applying them in a realistic manner due to line widths, interpretation of losses over short distances etc. It was further explained that GBAS planning within Europe is the first time the IF77 model had been used for planning purposes.
6.11.2 The meeting was also made aware that group had completed work on a revision of ITU-R Recommendation P.528 and that this revision had now been approved within the ITU-R.
Note: A useable copy of the IF77 model can be found within the ACP website repository.
6.12 Date of next meeting
6.12.1 The next meeting has been tentatively scheduled for the 20-30 March 2012 at ICAO Headquarters, Montreal.
APPENDICES
Appendix A - Agenda
Appendix B - List of Working Papers
Appendix C – List of Participants
Appendix D – Annex 10 Volume V proposals
Appendix E – Volume II Frequency Spectrum Handbook
Appendix F – WRC-12 Agenda Item 1.7 guidelines
Appendix G – WRC 5GHz band guidelines
Appendix H – LDACS information
Appendix I – Comments on Annex 10 Volume V Chapter 4 Attachment A
APPENDIX A
INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION
Western and Central Africa Office
25TH Meeting of the Aeronautical Communication Panel Working Group F
(ACP/WG-F/25)
(Dakar, Senegal, 10 – 14 October 2011)
Agenda
1. Opening and working arrangements
2. Review, update and development of the ICAO Frequency Spectrum
Handbook
WP7, WP8 – Annex 10 Volume V, chapter 4 updates
WP9, WP17 – Frequency Spectrum Handbook
3. Development of material for ITU-R meetings
WP2 – WRC-12 5GHz allocation
WP3 – ITU-R Recommendation M.1841
WP5, WP6, IP7 – Radio altimeters
WP12, IP3, IP4, IP5, IP6 – WRC-12 Agenda Item 1.7
WP13 – WRC-12 Agenda Item 1.3
4. Development of material for regional telecommunication organization
meetings
5. Interference from non-aeronautical sources
WP10, IP8 – 2.7-2.9 GHz radar
6. Any Other Business
WP4 – LDACS data links
WP11 – VDL4 signalling channels
WP14 – Vehicle Health Management (Off-board)
WP15 – VHF COM/GBAS compatibility
WP16 – AFI/FMG activities
WP18 – Aeronautical spectrum utilisation
IP1 – Report of the NSP SSG
IP2 – VHF communications system of Japan
IP9 – Administrative Incentive Pricing
IP10 – Spectrum release
IP11 – Calculation of propagation loss for GBAS
IP12 – IF77
-------------------
APPENDIX B
List of Papers
List of Working Papers
|Working Paper |Source |Title |Agenda Item |
|WP1 |Rapporteur |Agenda | |
|WP1 |Rapporteur |Work Programme | |
|WP2 |Secretary |Issues relating to potential modification by WRC-12 to the existing |3 |
| | |AMS(R)S allocation in the 5GHz band | |
|WP3 |Felix Butsch, Martin Weber |Proposed Modification to ITU-R M.1841 |3 |
|WP4 |Claude Pichavant, Larry |SELECTION OF TECHNOLOGY FOR THE LDACS DATA LINK |6 |
| |Johnsson, Stephane Tamalet, | | |
| |Luc Deneufchatel | | |
|WP5 |John Taylor |Operation of Ground Proximity Warning System and Terrain Avoidance |3 |
| | |Warning System | |
|WP6 |Eric Allaix |Radioaltimeter recommendation under study in ITU-R |3 |
|WP7 |Secretary |Amendments to Annex 10, Volume V, Chapter 4 |2 |
|WP8 |Gerlof Osinga |Comments on WP07, Amendments to Annex 10, Volume V, Chapter 4 |2 |
|WP9 |Secretary |Handbook on radio frequency spectrum requirements for civil aviation;|2 |
| | |Part II Frequency assignment planning criteria for aeronautical | |
| | |communication and navigation systems | |
|WP10 |Eric Allaix |ADJACENT SHARING ISSUE BETWEEN ATC PRIMARY RADAR (2700-2900 MHz AND |5 |
| | |MOBILE SERVICE BELOW (2500-2690 MHz) | |
|WP10 |Eric Allaix |Attachment to WP10 |5 |
|WP11 |Robert Witzen, Larry Johnsson|Common Signalling Channels for VDL Mode 4 (rev mtg) |6 |
|WP12 |Yoshio SUZUKI |Interim Report of the Correspondence Group Dealing with WRC-12 Agenda|3 |
| | |Item 1.7 | |
|WP13 |Robert J. Kerczewski |Development of Command and Non-Payload Communications Systems for |3 |
| | |Unmanned Aircraft Systems | |
|WP14 |Robert J. Kerczewski |Update on Off-Board Communications for Vehicle Health Management – |6 |
| | |Airport Surface | |
|WP15 |Stefan Mueller, Helmut |SINAD-degradation method to establish a protection threshold of VHF |6 |
| |Guenzel, Felix Butsch |COM against GBAS VDB interference (rev1) | |
|WP16 |ASECNA |Information on the AFI/FMG second meeting, the activities of the |6 |
| | |group and the ITU WRC preparatory meeting (rev1) | |
|WP17 |Secretary |EUR FMG revision of Doc 9718 and Annex 10 |2 |
|WP18 |Alessandro Prister, Robert |SESAR Joint Undertaking - Analysis of Aeronautical Spectrum |6 |
| |Witzen |Utilization and Impact Assessment | |
|WP18 |Alessandro Prister, Robert |Cover Page: |6 |
| |Witzen |SESAR Joint Undertaking - Analysis of Aeronautical Spectrum | |
| | |Utilization and Impact Assessment | |
List of Information Papers
|Information Paper |Source |Title |Agenda Item |
|IP1 |Rapporteur of NSP SSG |REPORT OF THE ICAO NSP SPECTRUM SUB-GROUP (SSG) MEETING 16th to |6 |
| | |18th May, 2011, ICAO Headquarters, Montreal, Canada | |
|IP2 |Junichi Tanaka |The air-ground VHF communication system of Japan |6 |
|IP3 |Yoshio SUZUKI |CPM Report, Agenda Item 1.7 |3 |
|IP4 |Yoshio SUZUKI |Preliminary APT Common Proposals on WRC-12 Agenda Item 1.7 |3 |
|IP5 |Yoshio SUZUKI |Working documents towards a preliminary draft new Report ITU-R |3 |
| | |M.[AMS(R)S.METHODOLOGY]-Annex 6 to Doc. 4C/660 | |
|IP6 |Eric Allaix |Preliminary Draft European Common Proposal on Agenda Item 1.7 |3 |
| | |(WRC-12) (CPGPTD(11)063 Annex 6) | |
|IP7 |John Mettrop |INTERFERENCE TO RADIO ALTIMETERS |5 |
|IP7 |John Mettrop |Appendix 1 of IP07 |5 |
|IP7 |John Mettrop |Appendix 2 of IP07 |5 |
|IP8 |John Mettrop |Radar compatibility with Mobile Systems Around 2.7 GHz UK |5 |
| | |Progress | |
|IP9 |John Mettrop |ADMINISTRATIVE INCENTIVE PRICING |6 |
|IP10 |John Mettrop |Spectrum Release |6 |
|IP11 |Joachim Wollweber, |Problems with the calculation of propagation loss in the context |6 |
| |Felix Butsch |of frequency coordination for GBAS | |
|IP12 |Joachim Wollweber |Material on IF77 and ITU-R P.528 propagation model |6 |
APPENDIX C
[pic]
Twenty Fifth Meeting of ACP Working Group F (ACP WG-F/25)
(Dakar, Senegal, 10 – 14 October 2011)
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
| |STATE/ |NAME |FONCTION |ADDRESS |TELEPHONE/FAX/E-Mail |
| |ORGANIZATION | | | | |
| |ALGERIA |LAMRI BOUDJEMA |Director of Operations |ENNA - 01, Av. de l’Indépendance, Alger |Tel:+213-661926709 |
| | | | | |Fax:+213-21676857 |
| | | | | |dena@enna.dz |
| | | | | |lamri_bk@ |
| |ANGOLA |BERNARDINO SALVADOR LUCAS CARLOS |Chief ATS Planning Division |ENANA, C.P.841, Luanda, Angola |Tel:+244-923415378 |
| | | | | |Fax:+244-222651038 |
| | | | | |bcarlos@enana- |
| | |DOMINGOS VAMBANO RAFAEL |Technician |ENANA, C.P.841, Luanda, Angola |Tel:+244-923501656 |
| | | | | |Fax :+244-222651038 |
| | | | | |domingovambanu@ |
| |BURKINA FASO |SOUMAILA BARRY |Chef de Service Navigation aérienne |DGACM 01 BP 1158 Ouagadougou 01 Burkina |Tel:+226-78040686 |
| | | | |Faso |Fax:+226-50314544 |
| | | | | |barry.soumaila@yahoo.fr |
| | |HASSANE IBRAHIM KONE |Cadre Navigation aérienne |DGACM 01 BP 1158 Ouagadougou 01 Burkina |Tel:+223-50306488 |
| | | | |Faso |Fax:+226-50314544 |
| | | | | |hkone92@yahoo.fr |
| |BRAZIL |WALDIR GALLUZZI NUNES |Spectrum and Frequencies Manager |Av. Gen Justo 160 DECEA Rio de Janeiro, |Tel:+55-21 21016392 |
| | | | |Brazil |Fax:+55-21 21016392 |
| | | | | |ddte4@.br |
| |CAMEROON |ESSIMI LEOPOLDINE |Sous-Directeur Navigation aérienne |BP 6998 CCAA Yaoundé, Cameroun |Tel:+237-22303090 |
| | | | | |Fax:+237-22303362 |
| | | | | |leopoldine.essimi@ccaa.aero |
| | |NGONGANG ROBERT |Chef Bureau des Aides à la Navigation |BP 6998 CCAA Yaoundé, Cameroun |Tel:+237-99685692 |
| | | | | |Fax:+237-22303362 |
| | | | | |robertngongang@yahoo.fr |
| |EGYPT |SAMEH MOHAMED HUSSEIN |Extended range communication manager |Cairo Airport – Cargo road National Air |Tel:+ 2010-03815137 |
| | | | |Navigation Services Company NANSC |Fax:+202 22680629 |
| | | | | |sameh.mahdali@ |
| |FRANCE |ALLAIX ERIC |Head of Spectrum and Frequencies management Office|DGAC - 50, rue Henry Farman 75015 Paris, |Tel:+33-613165223 |
| | | | |France |eric.allaix@aviation-civile.gouv.fr |
| |GABON |NADINE AWANANG ANATO |ANS Inspector |ANAC – BP 2212 Libreville Gabon |Tel:+241-445400/07310333 |
| | | | | |Fax:+241-445401 |
| | | | | |nadine.anato@anac- |
| |GERMANY |BUTSCH FELIX |Head of Spectrum Management |Am DFS-Campus 10, 63225 Langen, Germany |Tel:+4961037071533 |
| | | |Germany, DFS Deutsche Flugsicherung 6m6H | |Felix.Butsch@dfs.de |
| | |WOLLWEBER JOACHIM |Sen. ATC Engineer |Robert-Boch-Str 28 D-6 3225 Langen |Tel:+49-61038043327 |
| | | | |Germany |Fax:+49-61038043250 |
| | | | | |Joachim.wollweber@BAF.Bund.de |
| |JAPAN |YOSHIYUKI MIKUNI |Special Assistant to the Director |Civil Aviation Bureau of Japan – 2-1-3 |Tel:+81-3-5253-8142 |
| | | | |Kasumisaseki, chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan |mikuni-y2bd@mlit.go.jp |
| | |SUZUKI YOSHIO |Project Manager |Japan Radio Air Navigation Systems |Tel:+81-3-5214-1353 |
| | | | |Association (JRANSA) – 4-5 kojimachi, |Fax:+81-3-5214-1359 |
| | | | |chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 102-0083 Japan |suzuki@jransa.or.jp |
| | |TAIJI TSUCHIYA |Technical Official |Telecommunication Bureau |taizi99@ |
| | | | |2-1-2 Kasumigaseki Chiyoda-ward Tokyo |t.tsuchiya@soumu.go.jp |
| | | | |100-8795 Japan | |
| | |JUNICHI TANAKA |DuptyDirector Mobile Satellite Communication |Telecommunication Bureau |Tel:+81-3-5253-5902 |
| | | |Division |2-1-2 Kasumigaseki Chiyoda-ward Tokyo |Fax:+81-3-5253-5903 |
| | | | |100-8795 Japan |j-tanaka@soumu.go.jp |
| |LIBERIA |F. AUGUSTINE C. TAMBA |Manager CNS |LCAA – Harbel Margibi County, PO Box 68, |Tel:+231-776998815/6570463 |
| | | | |Liberia |atamba.navs@ |
| | |JONATHAN C. ENDERS |Asst. Manager CNS |LCAA - Harbel Margibi County, PO Box 68, |Tel:+231-776998814 |
| | | | |Liberia |jenders.navs@ |
| |MADAGASCAR |RAKOTOARIVELO FREDERIC |Inspecteur Chargé du CNS |Aviation civile - rue Fernand Kasanga 13|Tel:+261-320724003 |
| | | | |Tsimbajaja - Antananarivo |Fax:+ |
| | | | | |fredericrakotoar@acm.mg |
| |NETHERLANDS |OSINGA |RCA |PO Box 456 9700 Al Groninqeu |Tel:+31-505877276 |
| | | | | |gerlofosinga@agentschaptelecom.nl |
| | | | | |gerlof.osinga@ agentschaptelecom.nl |
| |NIGERIA |ONUIGBO SAMUEL OJUKWU |ANS Safety Inspector |NCAA HQ - PMB 21029, Ikeja Lagos, Nigeria|Tel:+234-1-4721521 |
| | | | | |ojukwu1904@ |
| |PHILIPPINES |LUCIANO R. MACUSE |Supvg Airways Communicator |Air Traffic Service, Civil Aviation |Tel:+632-8799259 |
| | | | |Authority of the Philippines |Fax:+632-8799259 |
| | | | |CAAP Bldg, Naia Road Pasay City, |xrm_010760@ |
| | | | |Philippines | |
| | |CHARLEMAGNE P. GILO |Asst. Chief Airways Communicator |Civil Aviation Authority of the |Tel:+632-8799159 |
| | | | |Philippines |Fax:+632-8799259 |
| | | | |ATS 4th Flr. CAAP Bldg, Naia Road Pasay |charlemagne.gilo@ |
| | | | |City, | |
|R |RWANDA |SABIITI EMMANUEL |Chief Air Navigation Technical Services |c/o - BP 1122, RCAA-Kigali, Rwanda |Tel:+250-252583441/788508271 |
| | | | | |Fax:+250-252582609 |
| | | | | |esabiiti@.rw |
| |SOUTH AFRICA |TSHIFULARO SIGWAVHULIMU |Specialist : Frequency spectrum |SACAA |Tel:+27-11 5451049 |
| | | | |Ikhaya Lokundiza |Fax:+27-11 5451541 |
| | | | |Building 16 |sigwavhulimut@caa.co.za |
| | | | |Treur Close | |
| | | | |Midrand | |
| | | | |South Africa | |
| | |KOOS PRETORIUS |Manager CNS |SACAA |Tel:+27-115451066 |
| | | | |Ikhaya Lokundiza |Fax:+27-115451451 |
| | | | |Building 16 |pretoriusk@caa.co.za |
| | | | |Treur Close | |
| | | | |Midrand | |
| | | | |South Africa | |
| |SWEDEN |ROBERT WITZEN |Consultant Frequency Spectrum |342 Pennrd Beaconsfield Quebec Canada |Tel:+1-514 4267654 |
| | | | | |r.witzen@videotron.ca |
| |TANZANIA |VALENTINA N. KAYOMBO |Chief Air Navigation Engineer (CNS) |CAA – PO Box 2819 Dar-es-Salaam, Tanzania|Tel :+255-222198100 |
| | | | | |Fax :+255-222844300 |
| | | | | |vkayombo@tcaa.go.tz |
| |UGANDA |RICHARD M. RUHESI |Director Air Navigation Services |CAA - P.O. Box 5536, Kampala, Uganda |Tel:+256-752643073 |
| | | | | |Fax:+256-414320969 |
| | | | | |rruhesi@caa.co.ug |
| | | | | |richard.ruhesi@ |
| |UNITED KINGDOM |STEVE MITCHELL |Spectrum Manager |NATS, Corporate & Technical Centre – |Tel:+44-1489444646 |
| | | | |4000-4200 Parkway, Whiteley, Fareham, |steve.mitchell@nats.co.uk |
| | | | |Hampshire, UK | |
| | |JOHN METTROP |Spectrum Engineer |CAA – 45-59 Kingsway, London WC2B 6TE, UK|Tel:+44-2074536531 |
| | | | | |john.mettrop@caa.co.uk |
|U |USA |ROBERT KERCSEWSKI |Project manager |USA NASA – 21000 Brookpark Road |Tel:+1-216 4333434 |
| | | | |Cleveland, Ohio 44135, USA |Fax:+1-216 4338705 |
| | | | | |rkerczewski@ |
| |USA |MICHAEL BIGGS |Senior Engineer |FAA – AJW-933, Room 715 800 Independence |Tel:+1-202 2678241 |
| | | | |Ave SW Washington, DC 20591 |Fax:+1-202 2675901 |
| | | | | |michael.biggs@ |
| | |BRANDON MITCHELL |NTIA |1401 Constitution Ave NW Washington DC |Tel :+1-202 4824487 |
| | | | |20230 |bmitchell@ntia. |
| |AIRBUS |PICHAVANT CLAUDE |ICCAIA Member for ACP |316 Route de Bayonne |Tel:+33-622452389 |
| | | | |31060 Toulouse Cedex France |claude.pichavant@ |
| |ASECNA |SOUGUE BISSA |Aeronautical Telecommunications Manager |BP 3144 Dakar, Senegal |Tel:+221-776542355 |
| | | | | |Fax:+221-338207538 |
| | | | | |souguebis@ |
| | |SANT’ANNA ABDEL NASSER |Chargé R&D CNS/MTO |BP 8163 Dakar Yoff, Senegal |Tel:+221-338695658 |
| | | | | |Fax:+33-8200015 |
| | | | | |santannaabd@ |
| | |SIBITANG MINGO ALADJOU |Chargé d’activités Gestion et Exploitation |BP 8169 Dakar, Senegal |Tel:+221-774936867 |
| | | |Communication fixe et Navigation | |sibitangd@ |
| | |THIOUNE ABOUBACAR |Chef Unité CNS/MET |BP 24322 Dakar, Senegal |Tel:+221-775143701/338692272 |
| | | | | |thiouneabo@ |
| | |DIALLO OUMAR |Ingénieur Aéronautique |ASECNA Sénégal |Tel :+221-338692301/777046902 |
| | | | | |o-yacine@yahoo.fr |
| | |KAG-TEUBE NGARTABE |Cadre Gestion Communication Mobile et Surveillance|BP 3144 Dakar, Senegal |Tel :+221-776439709 |
| | | | | |kagteubenga@ |
| | | | | |kagteubedaniel@ |
| | |RIBEIRO CAMI | |Bp 8132 Dakar Yoff, Senegal |Tel:+221-338692362 |
| | | | | |Fax:+221-338200252 |
| | | | | |ribeirocam@ |
| |BOEING |MARCELLA OST |Regional Director Regulatory Policy and |588 Maclaren St. Ottawa, ON KIR5K9 Canada|Tel:+1-613 7902270 |
| | | |International Spectrum Management | |marcella.s.ost@ |
| |EUROCONTROL |ALESSANDRO PRISTER |Head of Radio Spectrum Management |Rue de la Fusée, 96 |Tel :+32-2 7294687 |
| | | | |1130 Bruxelles, Belgique |alessandro.prister@eurocontrol.int |
| | | | | | |
| |ITU |NIKOLAI VASSILIEV |Head, Fixed and Mobile Services Division |Place des Nations, 1211, Geneve 20, |Tel:+41-22 7305530 |
| | | | |Switzerland |nikolai.vassiliev@itu.int |
| |ICAO CACAS |JACKSON NZIOKI |Chief Aeronautical Communication |PO Box 46294 – 00100 Nairobi, Kenya |Tel :+254-20 7622785 |
| | | | | |Fax :+254-20 7122340 |
| | | | | |Jackson.nzioki@icao. |
| | |MOSES LUSAMBILI |Maintenance Engineer |PO Box 46294 – 00100 Nairobi, Kenya |Tel:+254-20 7622785 |
| | | | | |Fax:+254-20 7122340 |
| | | | | |moses.lusambili@icao. |
| |ICAO |LOFTUR JONASSON |Technical Officer, CNS |ICAO Headquarters Montreal, Canada |Tel:+15149548219 ext.7130 |
| | | | | |ljonasson@icao.int |
| | |PROSPER ZO’O MINTO’O |Regional Officer, CNS |ICAO ESAF, |Tel:+254-207622367 |
| | | | |POB 46294-0100 Nairobi, Kenya |prosper.zoomintoo@icao. |
| | |SALAMBANGA FRANCOIS-XAVIER |Regional Officer, CNS |ICAO WACAF |Tel:+221-33 8692415 |
| | | | |BP 2356 – Dakar- Senegal |fsalambanga@dakar.icao.int |
APPENDIX D
|[pic] | |ACP WGF/25 XXXX |
| |International Civil Aviation Organization |04/10/2011 |
| | | |
| |FLIMSY | |
| | | |
CHAPTER 4. UTILIZATION OF FREQUENCIES ABOVE 30 MHz
Details pertaining to the allocation of spectrum to aeronautical services, including footnoted allocations and restrictions, are contained in both the ITU Radio Regulations of the International Telecommunication Union and the ICAO Handbook on radio frequency spectrum requirements for civil aviation (Doc.9718)
4.1 Utilization in the band
117.975 – 137.000 MHz
Introduction
Section 4.1 deals with Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) relating to the use of the band 117.975 – 137.000 MHz and includes matters pertaining to the selection of particular frequencies for various aeronautical purposes. These SARPs are introduced by the following preface, which sets out the principles upon which the utilization of this frequency band on a worldwide basis, with due regard to economy, is being planned.
Preface
The utilization of the frequency band 117.975 – 137.000 MHz on a worldwide basis with due regard to economy and practicability requires a plan that will take into account:
a) the need for an orderly evolution towards improved operation and the required degree of worldwide standardization;
b) the desirability of providing for an economic transition from present utilization to optimum utilization of the frequencies available, taking into account the maximum possible utilization of existing equipment;
c) the need to provide for coordination between international and national utilization so as to ensure mutual protection from interference;
d) the need for providing a global framework for the coordinated integrated development of Regional Plans;
e) the need in certain regions to have more detailed plans and planning criteria which may vary in detail from the provisions in this Section
e) the desirability of incorporating in any group of frequencies to be used those now in use for international air services;
f) the need for keeping the total number of frequencies and their grouping in appropriate relation to the airborne equipment known to be widely used by international air services;
g) a requirement for the provision of a single frequency that may be used for emergency purposes on a world-wide basis and, also, in certain regions, for another frequency that may be used as a common frequency for special purposes; and
h) the need for providing sufficient flexibility to allow for the differences in application necessitated by regional conditions.
4.1.1 General allotment of
frequency band 117.975 – 137 MHz
Note.— The plan includes a general Allotment Table that subdivides the complete band 117.975 – 137.000 MHz, the chief subdivisions being the bands of frequencies allocated to both national and international services, and the bands allocated to national services. Observance of this general subdivision should keep to a minimum the problem of coordinating national and international application.
4.1.1.1 The block allotment of the frequency band 117.975 – 137.000 MHz shall be as shown in Table 4-1.
Table 4-1. Allotment table
LOFTUR TO UPDATE THE NEW GUARD BAND that excludes both 8.33 and 25 kHz frequency assignments; TIBA
|Block allotment of |Worldwide utilization |Remarks |
|Frequencies (MHz) | | |
|a) 118.000 – 121.4 |International and National |Specific international allotments will be determined in the light of |
|inclusive |Aeronautical Mobile Services |regional |
| | |agreement. National assignments are covered by the provisions in 4.1.5.9. |
|b) 121.500 |Emergency frequency |In order to provide a guard band for the protection of the aeronautical |
| | |emergency frequency, the nearest assignable frequencies on either side of |
| | |121.5 MHz are 121.4 MHz and 121.6 MHz, except that by regional agreement it|
| | |may be decided that the nearest assignable frequencies are 121.3 MHz and |
| | |121.7 MHz. |
|c) 121.6 – 121.9917 |International and National |Reserved for ground movement, pre-flight checking, air traffic services |
|inclusive |Aerodrome Surface |clearances, and associated operations. |
| |Communications | |
|d) 122.000 – 123.050 |National Aeronautical Mobile |Reserved for national allotments. |
|inclusive |Services | |
|e) 123.100 |Auxiliary frequency SAR |See 4.1.4.1. |
|f) 123.150– 123.6917 |National Aeronautical Mobile |Reserved for national allotments, with the exception of 123.45 MHz which is|
|inclusive |Services |also used as an the worldwide air-to-air communications channel as provided|
| | |for in 4.1.3.2.1(see g)). |
| | |TIBA? |
|g) 123.450 |Air-to-air communications |Designated for use as provided for in 4.1.3.2.1. |
|h) 123.700– 129.6917 |International and National |Specific international allotments will be determined in light of regional |
|inclusive |Aeronautical Mobile Services |agreement. National assignments are covered by the provisions in 4.1.5.9. |
|i) 129.700 – 130.8917 |National Aeronautical Mobile |Reserved for national allotments but may be used in whole or in part, |
|inclusive |Services |subject to regional agreement, to meet the requirements mentioned in |
| | |4.1.8.1.3. |
|j) 130.900 – 136.875 |International and National |Specific international allotments will be determined in light of regional |
|inclusive |Aeronautical Mobile Services |agreement. National assignments are covered by the provisions in 4.1.5.9. |
| | |(See the Introduction to 4.1 regarding the band 132 – 137 MHz.) |
|k) 136.900 – 136.975 |International and National |Reserved for VHF air-ground data link communications. |
|inclusive |Aeronautical Mobile Services | |
4.1.1.2 Recommendation.— In the case of the band 136 – 137 MHz, international applications have not yet been agreed, and these frequencies should be brought into use on a regional basis where and in the manner required.
4.1.2 Frequency separation and limits
of assignable frequencies
Note.— In the following text the channel spacing for 8.33 kHz channel assignments is defined as 25 kHz divided by 3 which is 8.333 ... kHz.
4.1.2.1 The minimum separation between assignable frequencies in the aeronautical mobile (R) service shall be 8.33 kHz.
Note.— It is recognized that in some regions or areas, 100 kHz, 50 kHz or 25 kHz channel spacing provides an adequate number of frequencies suitably related to international and national air services and that equipment designed specifically for 100 kHz, 50 kHz or 25 kHz channel spacing will remain adequate for services operating within such regions or areas. It is further recognized that assignments based on 25 kHz channel spacing as well as 8.33 kHz channel spacing may continue to co-exist within one region or area.
4.1.2.2 Until at least 1 January 2005, DSB-AM equipment specifically designed for 25 kHz channel spacing shall be safeguarded with respect to its suitability for the aeronautical mozbile (R) service (AM(R)S) except in those regions or areas where regional agreement permits the use of equipment specifically designed for 8.33 kHz channel spacing or for VDL Mode 3 when used for air-ground voice communications. Reshuffle 4.1.2.2 plus sub-paras into a more consistent para }
4.1.2.2.1 Requirements for mandatory carriage of equipment specifically designed for 8.33 kHz channel spacing shall be made on the basis of regional air navigation agreements which specify the airspace of operation and the implementation timescales for the carriage of equipment, including the appropriate lead time.
Note.— No changes will be required to aircraft systems or ground systems operating solely in regions not using 8.33 kHz channel spacing.
4.1.2.2.2 Until at least 1 January 2005, equipment specifically designed for 8.33 kHz channel spacing shall be safeguarded with respect to its suitability for the AM(R)S.
4.1.2.2.3 Requirements for mandatory carriage of equipment specifically designed for VDL Mode 2, VDL Mode 3 and VDL Mode 4 shall be made on the basis of regional air navigation agreements which specify the airspace of operation and the implementation timescales for the carriage of equipment, including the appropriate lead time.
4.1.2.2.3.1 The agreement indicated in 4.1.2.2.3 shall provide at least two years’ notice of mandatory carriage of airborne systems.
4.1.2.2.4 Until at least 1 January 2010, equipment specifically designed to the VDL Mode 3 and VDL Mode 4 SARPs shall be safeguarded with respect to its suitability for the AM(R)S.
4.1.2.3 In the band 117.975 – 137 MHz, the lowest assignable frequency shall be 118.000 MHz and the highest 136.975 MHz. (Editorial note: move this paragraph to the beginning of section 4.1.2)
4.1.2.4 In regions where 25 kHz channel spacing (DSB-AM and VHF digital link (VDL Mode 3)) and 8.33 kHz DSB-AM channel spacing are in operation, the publication of the assigned frequency or channel of operation shall conform to the channel contained in Table 4-1 (bis).
Note.— Table 4-1 (bis) provides the frequency channel pairing plan which retains the numerical designator of the 25 kHz DSB-AM environment and allows unique identification of a 25 kHz VDL Mode 3 and 8.33 kHz channel.
4.1.3 Frequencies used for particular functions
4.1.3.1 Emergency channel
4.1.3.1.1 The emergency channel (121.500 MHz) shall be used only for genuine emergency purposes, as broadly out-lined in the following:
a) to provide a clear channel between aircraft in distress or emergency and a ground station when the normal channels are being utilized for other aircraft;
Table 4-1 (bis). Channelling/frequency pairing
Editorial note: move this table preferably to right below 4.1.2.4, if possible
|Frequency |Time |Channel |Channel |
|(MHz) |slot* |spacing (kHz) | |
|118.0000 | |25 |118.000 |
| | | | |
|118.0000 |A |25 |118.001 |
|118.0000 |B |25 |118.002 |
|118.0000 |C |25 |118.003 |
|118.0000 |D |25 |118.004 |
| | | | |
|118.0000 | |8.33 |118.005 |
|118.0083 | |8.33 |118.010 |
|118.0167 | |8.33 |118.015 |
| | | | |
|118.0250 |A |25 |118.021 |
|118.0250 |B |25 |118.022 |
|118.0250 |C |25 |118.023 |
|118.0250 |D |25 |118.024 |
| | | | |
|118.0250 | |25 |118.025 |
| | | | |
|118.0250 | |8.33 |118.030 |
|118.0333 | |8.33 |118.035 |
|118.0417 | |8.33 |118.040 |
| | | | |
|118.0500 | |25 |118.050 |
| | | | |
|118.0500 |A |25 |118.051 |
|118.0500 |B |25 |118.052 |
|118.0500 |C |25 |118.053 |
|118.0500 |D |25 |118.054 |
| | | | |
|118.0500 | |8.33 |118.055 |
|118.0583 | |8.33 |118.060 |
|118.0667 | |8.33 |118.065 |
| | | | |
|118.0750 |A |25 |118.071 |
|118.0750 |B |25 |118.072 |
|118.0750 |C |25 |118.073 |
|118.0750 |D |25 |118.074 |
| | | | |
|118.0750 | |25 |118.075 |
| | | | |
|118.0750 | |8.33 |118.080 |
|118.0833 | |8.33 |118.085 |
|118.0917 | |8.33 |118.090 |
| | | | |
|118.1000 | |25 |118.100 |
| | | | |
|etc. | | | |
| |
|* Time slot indication is for VDL Mode 3 channels. (Ref. Annex 10, |
|Volume III, Part I, Chapter 6 for characteristics of VDL Mode 3 |
|operation) |
b) to provide a VHF communication channel between aircraft and aerodromes, not normally used by international air services, in case of an emergency condition arising;
c) to provide a common VHF communication channel between aircraft, either civil or military, and between such aircraft, and surface services, involved in common search and rescue operations, prior to changing when necessary to the appropriate frequency;
d) to provide air-ground communication with aircraft when airborne equipment failure prevents the use of the regular channels;
e) to provide a channel for the operation of emergency locator transmitters (ELTs), and for communication between survival craft and aircraft engaged in search and rescue operations;
f) to provide a common VHF channel for communication between civil aircraft and intercepting aircraft or intercept control units and between civil or intercepting aircraft and air traffic services units in the event of interception of the civil aircraft.
Note 1.— The use of the frequency 121.5 MHz for the purpose outlined in c) is to be avoided if it interferes in any way with the efficient handling of distress traffic.
Note 2.— The current ITU Radio Regulations (RR 5.200) permit the use of make provisions that the aeronautical emergency frequency 121.5 MHz may also be used by mobile stations of the maritime mobile service under the conditions laid down in Article 31 of the Radio Regulations , using A3E emission to communicate on this frequency for distress and safety purposes with stations of the aeronautical mobile service (RR S5.200 and Appendix S13, Part A2).
4.1.3.1.2 The frequency 121.5 MHz shall be provided at:
a) all area control centres and flight information centres;
b) aerodrome control towers and approach control offices serving international aerodromes and international alternate aerodromes; and
c) any additional location designated by the appropriate ATS authority,
where the provision of that frequency is considered necessary to ensure immediate reception of distress calls or to serve the purposes specified in 4.1.3.1.1.
Note.— Where two or more of the above facilities are collocated, provision of 121.5 MHz at one would meet the requirement.
4.1.3.1.3 The frequency 121.5 MHz shall be available to intercept control units where considered necessary for the purpose specified in 4.1.3.1.1 f).
4.1.3.1.4 The emergency channel shall be guarded continuously during the hours of service of the units at which it is installed.
4.1.3.1.5 The emergency channel shall be guarded on a single channel simplex operation basis.
4.1.3.1.6 The emergency channel (121.5 MHz) available only with the characteristics as contained in Annex 10, Volume III, Part II, Chapter
4.1.3.2 Air-to-air communications channel
4.1.3.2.1 An air-to-air VHF communications channel on the frequency of 123.45 MHz shall be designated to enable aircraft engaged in flights over remote and oceanic areas out of range of VHF ground stations to exchange necessary operational information and to facilitate the resolution of operational problems.
Note.— Use of the air-to-air channel can cause interference to and from aircraft using the same frequency for air-ground communications.
4.1.3.2.2 In remote and oceanic areas out of range of VHF ground stations, the air-to-air VHF communications channel on the frequency 123.45 MHz shall be available only with the characteristics as contained in Annex 10, Volume III, Part II, Chapter 2
4.1.3.3 Common signalling channelVDL Mode 2. The frequency 136.975 MHz is reserved on a worldwide basis to provide a common signalling channel (CSC) to the VHF digital link Mode 2 (VDL Mode 2). This CSC uses the Mode 2 VDL modulation scheme and carrier sense multiple access (CSMA).
4.1.3.3 Common Signalling Channel VDL Mode 2. The frequency 136.975 MHz is reserved on a worldwide basis to provide a common signalling channel (CSC) to the VHF Digital Link Mode 2 (VDL Mode 2). This CSC uses the VDL Mode 2 modulation scheme and carrier sense multiple access (CSMA)
4.1.3.3 bis Common Signalling Channels VDL Mode 4. In areas where VDL Mode 4 is implemented, the frequencies [136.925] MHz and [XXX.XXX] MHz shall be provided as common signalling channels (CSC) to the VHF Digital Link Mode 4 (VDL Mode 4). These CSCs use the VDL Mode 4 modulation scheme.
4.1.4 Auxiliary frequencies for search and rescue operations
4.1.34.4.1 Where a requirement is established for the use of a frequency auxiliary to 121.5 MHz, as described in 4.1.3.1.1 c), the frequency 123.1 MHz shall be used.
4.1.3.54.2 The auxiliary search and rescue channel (123.1 MHz) shall be available only with the characteristics as contained in Annex 10, Volume III, Part II, Chapter 2.
Note — The ITU Radio Regulations (RR 5.200) permit the use of the aeronautical auxiliary frequency 121.3 MHz by mobile stations of the maritime mobile service under the conditions laid down in Article 31 of the Radio Regulations for distress and safety purposes with stations of the aeronautical mobile service .
4.1.5 Provisions concerning the deployment
of VHF frequencies and the avoidance of harmful interference
4.1.5.1 In the case of those VHF facilities providing service up to the radio horizon, the geographical separation between facilities working on the same frequency shall, except where there is an operational requirement for the use of common frequencies for groups of facilities, be such that points at the protection heights and at the limit of the functional service range of each facility are separated by distances not less than that required to provide a desired to undesired signal ratio of 14 dB. This provision shall be implemented on the basis of a regional air navigation agreement. For areas where frequency assignment congestion is not severe or is not anticipated to become severe, a 20 dB (10 to 1 distance ratio) separation criteria or radio line-of-sight (RLOS) separation criteria (whichever is smaller) may be used.
The geographical separation between facilities working on the same frequency shall, except where there is an operational requirement for the use of common frequencies for groups of facilities, be such that the frequency protected service volume coverage of each facility is separated from the designated operational coverage of the other facility by a distance not less than that required to provide a desired to undesired signal ratio of 20 dB or by a separation distance not less than the sum of the distances to associated radio horizon of each service volume, whichever is smaller
4.1.5.1.1 For areas where frequency assignment congestion is severe or is anticipated to become severe, the geographical separation between facilities working on the same frequency shall, except where there is an operational requirement for the use of common frequencies for groups of facilities, be such that the frequency protected service volume of each facility is separated from the designated operational coverage of the other facility by a distance not less than that required to provide a desired to undesired signal ratio of 14 dB or by a separation distance not less than the sum of the distances to the associated radio horizon of each service volume, whichever is smaller. This provision shall be implemented on the basis of a regional air navigation agreement.
Note 1.— Guidance material relating to the establishment of the minimum separation distance based on the desired to undesired signal protection ratio of 20 dB or 14 dB and radio line-of-sight is contained in Attachment A and the ICAO Handbook on radio frequency spectrum requirements for Civil Aviation, Volume II (Doc. 9718).
Note 2. – The application of the minimum separation distance based on the sum of the radio horizon distance of each facility assumes that it is highly unlikely that two aircraft will be at the closest points between and at the maximum altitude of the frequency protected service volume of each facility.
4.1.5.2 In the case of those VHF facilities providing service beyond the radio horizon, except where there is an operational requirement for the use of common frequencies for groups of facilities, planning for co-channel operations shall be such that points at the protection heights and at the limits of the functional service area of each facility are separated by distances not less than the sum of distances from each point to its associated radio horizon.
Note 1.— The distance to the radio horizon from a station in an aircraft is normally given by the formula:
D = K √ h
where D = distance in nautical miles;
h = height of the aircraft station above earth;
K = (corresponding to an effective earth’s radius of 4/3 of the actual radius);
= 2.22 when h is expressed in metres; and
= 1.23 when h is expressed in feet.
Note 2.— In calculating the radio line-of-sight distance between a ground station and an aircraft station, the distance from the radio horizon of the aircraft station computed from Note 1 must be added to the distance from the radio horizon of the ground station. In calculating the latter the same formula is employed, taking for h the height of the ground station transmitting antenna.
Note 3.— The criterion contained in 4.1.5.12 is applicable in establishing minimum geographical separation between VHF facilities, with the object of avoiding co-channel air-to-air interference. Guidance material relating to the establishment of separation distances between ground stations and between aircraft and ground stations for co-channel operations is contained in Section 3 of Attachment A and the ICAO Handbook on radio frequency spectrum requirements for Civil Aviation, Volume II (Doc. 9718). Guidance material relating to adjacent channel frequency deployment is contained in Section 2 of Attachment A.
4.1.5.3 The geographical separation between facilities operating working on adjacent channels shall be such that points at the edge of the frequency protected service volume protection heights and at the limit of the functional service range of each facility are separated by a distance sufficient to ensure operations free from harmful interference.
Note.— Guidance material covering separation distances and related system characteristics is contained in Attachment A and the ICAO Handbook on radio frequency spectrum requirements for Civil Aviation, Volume II (Doc. 9718).
4.1.5.4 The protection height shall be a height above a specified datum associated with a particular facility, such that below it harmful interference is improbable.
4.1.5.5 The protection height to be applied to functions or to specific facilities shall be determined regionally, taking into consideration the following factors:
a) the nature of the service to be provided;
b) the air traffic pattern involved;
c) the distribution of communication traffic;
d) the availability of frequency channels in airborne equipment;
e) probable future developments.
4.1.5.6 Recommendation.— Where the frequency protected service volume protection heights determined are is less than those operationally desirable, separation between facilities operating on the same frequency should not be less than that necessary to ensure that an aircraft at the upper edge limit of the frequency protected service volume functional service range and the operationally desirable protection height of one facility does not come above the radio horizon with respect to adjacent facilities.
Note.— The effect of this recommendation is to establish a geographical separation distance below which harmful interference is probable.
4.1.5.7 The geographical separation between VHF VOLMET stations shall be determined regionally and, generally, shall be such that operations free from harmful interference are secured throughout the frequency protected service volume of each VOLMET station at the highest altitude flown by aircraft in the area concerned.
Note.— Guidance material on the interpretation of 4.1.5.7 is contained in Attachment A and the ICAO Handbook on radio frequency spectrum requirements for Civil Aviation, Volume II (Doc. 9718).
4.1.5.8 Frequencies in the aeronautical mobile VHF band 117.975 – 137.000 MHz used for national services, unless worldwide or regionally allotted to this specific purpose, shall be so deployed that minimum no harmful interference is caused to facilities for the international air services in this band.
4.1.5.9 Recommendation.— The problem of inter-State interference on frequencies allotted worldwide or on a regional basis to national services, should be resolved by consultation between the States administrations concerned.
4.1.5.10 The communication coverage provided by a VHF ground transmitter shall, in order to avoid harmful interference to other stations, be kept to the minimum consistent with the operational requirement for the function.
4.1.5.11 Recommendation.— For ground VHF facilities which provide service beyond the radio horizon, any spurious or harmonic radiation outside the band ±250 kHz from the assigned carrier frequency should not exceed an effective radiated power of 1 mW in any azimuth.
4.1.6 Equipment requirements
Note 1.— Frequency tolerances to which stations operating in the aeronautical mobile band (117.975 – 137 MHz) must conform are contained in Appendix 3 to the Radio Regulations. Tolerances for transmitters used for aeronautical services are not mentioned in this Annex, except in those cases where tighter tolerances than those contained in the Radio Regulations are required (e.g. the equipment specifications in Volume III contain several such instances).
Note 2.— The frequency tolerance applicable to individual components of a multi-carrier or similar system will be determined by the characteristics of the specific system.
4.1.6.1 Recommendation.— The antenna gain of an extended range VHF facility should preferably be such as to ensure that, beyond the limits of ±2Φ about the centre line of the angular width Φ of the area to be served, it does not exceed 3 dB above that of a dipole. But, in any case, it should be such as to ensure freedom from harmful interference with other radio services.
Note 1.— The actual azimuth, the angular width of the service area, and the effective radiated power would have to be taken into account in each individual case.
Note 2.— Guidance material on the interpretation of 4.1.6.1 is contained in Attachment A.
4.1.7 Method of operation
4.1.7.1 Single channel simplex operation shall be used in the VHF frequency band 117.975 – 137.000 MHz at all stations providing service for aircraft engaged in international air navigation.
4.1.7.2 In addition to the above, the ground-to-air voice channel associated with an ICAO standard radio navigational aid may be used, subject to regional agreement, for broadcast or communication purposes or both.
4.1.8 Plan of assignable VHF radio frequencies
for use in the international aeronautical mobile service
Introduction
This plan designates the list of frequencies available for assignment, together with provision for the use by the aeronautical mobile (R) service of all frequencies with a channel spacing of 25 kHz, and of all frequencies with a channel width and spacing of 8.33 kHz., with the frequencies in Group A continuing to be used wherever they provide a sufficient number to meet the operational requirements.
The plan provides that the total number of frequencies required in any region would be determined regionally. The effect of this will be that frequencies assignable in any particular region may be restricted to a limited number of the frequencies in the list, the actual number being selected as outlined herein.
In order that the assignable frequencies may be coordinated between regions as far as practicable, the plan requires that, whenever the number of frequencies contained in Group A of 4.1.8.1.2 is sufficient to meet the requirements of a region, the frequencies of this Group be used in a sequence commencing with 118 MHz. This ensures that all regions will have in common the frequencies used in the region requiring the least number of frequencies and, in respect to any two regions, the region with the greater number will have in use all the frequencies used by the other.
Group A provides for frequency planning based on 100 kHz channel spacing.
Group B of the list at 4.1.8.1.2 contains the frequencies in the band 117.975 – 132 MHz ending in 50 kHz. Together with the frequencies in Group A, they provide for frequency planning based on 50 kHz channel spacing. In Group C are listed the frequency channels in the band 132 – 137 MHz based upon 50 kHz channel spacing. Group D contains the frequency channels in the band 132 – 137 MHz ending in 25 kHz, and Group E similarly lists the frequency channels in the band 117.975 – 132 MHz. The utilization of channels in Groups B, C, D and E is explained below.
Group F of the list at 4.1.8.1.2 contains the frequencies in the band 117.975 – 137 MHz when 8.33 kHz channel width is used. The utilization of the channels in this Group is explained below.
Whenever the number of frequencies required in a particular region exceeds the number in Group A, frequencies may be selected from the other Groups taking into account the provisions of 4.1.8.1 with respect to the use of channels based on 25 kHz channel spacing and, with regard to the band 132 – 137 MHz, the provisions of the Radio Regulations (see Introduction to 4.1). Although for Groups B, C, D and E a preferred order of selection is not indicated, regional planning may require a particular selection of frequencies from these Groups in order to cater for specific regional circumstances. This may apply particularly to the utilization of frequencies from the band 132 – 137 MHz for reasons of available airborne equipment and/or availability of particular frequency channels for the aeronautical mobile (R) service. It may also be found that, in a particular region, it is desirable to select frequencies from Group B first, before selecting frequencies from Groups C, D or E.
Where all the channels of Groups A, B, C, D and E of the list at 4.1.8.1.2 are insufficient to meet the requirements of a region, a part or parts of the band may be designated as containing 8.33 kHz width channels or designated as supporting VDL Mode 3. For parts of the band containing 8.33 kHz width channels, the appropriate frequencies from Group F should be used in accordance with 4.1.8.1.1.1 and 4.1.8.1.2. It should be noted that the designation of frequencies in Group F differs from that of the corresponding frequencies in Groups A to E to emphasize the difference in channel width. For part of the bands supporting VDL Mode 3, frequencies from Groups A, B, C, D and E are utilized on a time-division basis. A single frequency supports multiple channels, each utilizing the frequency in periodic time frames or time slots. Specific time slots for VDL Mode 3 are identified using the numeric designators of Table 4-1 (bis).
Although for Group F a preferred order of selection is not indicated, regional planning may require a particular selection of frequencies from this group in order to cater for specific regional circumstances.
In many regions particular frequencies have already been allotted assigned for particular functions as, for instance, aerodrome or approach control. The plan does not make such allotmentsassignments (except as provided for in 4.1.1.1)in respect to the emergency channel and ground service frequencies), such action being taken regionally if considered desirable.
LOFTUR: would this need an editorial update? I think it is OK.
4.1.8.1 The frequencies in the frequency band 117.975 – 137 MHz for use in the aeronautical mobile (R) service shall be selected from the lists in 4.1.8.1.2.
4.1.8.1.1 When the number of frequencies required in a particular region does not exceed the number of frequencies contained in Group A of 4.1.8.1.2, the frequencies to be used shall be selected in sequence, in so far as practicable, from those in Group A of 4.1.8.1.2.
4.1.8.1.1.1 When the number of frequencies required in a particular region exceeds those available in Groups A to E of 4.1.8.1.2, parts of the band shall be designated as containing 8.33 kHz width channels (voice) or as containing VDL Mode 3. Appropriate frequencies shall be selected from Group F of 4.1.8.1.2 for 8.33 kHz channel assignments or from Groups A to E in accordance with the time-slot assignments in accordance with Table 4-1 (bis) for VDL Mode 3. The remainder of the band shall continue to be used for 25 kHz width channels selected from the appropriate parts of Groups A to E.
Note 1.— The frequencies 121.425 – 121.575 MHz inclusive, 123.075 – 123.125 MHz inclusive and 136.500 – 136.975 MHz inclusive are not available for assignment to channels of less than 25 kHz width or VDL Mode 3.
LOFTUR: Frequency bands to be adjusted in accordance with reduced guard band
Note 2.— Services that continue operation using 25 kHz assignments will be protected in regions implementing 8.33 kHz channel spacing.
4.1.8.1.2 List of assignable frequencies
The list of assignable frequencies is shown in the Appendix to this chapter.
4.1.8.1.2.1 List A contains the assignable frequencies in Regions or areas where 25 kHz frequency assignments are deployed
4.1.8.1.2.2 List B contains the assignable frequencies in Regions or areas where 8.33 kHz assignments are deployed.
4.1.8.1.3.3 For VDL Mode 3, frequency assignments are made in accordance with the provisions of 4.1.8.1.2 and the VDL Mode 3 time-slot assignments in accordance with Table 4-1 (bis).
Note: In Regions or areas frequency assignments from both List A and List B can be used.
4.1.8.1.3 Recommendation.— Frequencies for operational control communications may be required to enable aircraft operating agencies to meet the obligations prescribed in Annex 6, Part I, in which case they should be selected from a dedicated the bands 128.825 – 132.025 MHz which is determined Regionally. These frequencies should be chosen, in so far as practicable, from the upper end of the band and in sequential order.
Note.— It is recognized that the assignment of such frequencies and the licensing of the operation of the related facilities are matters for national determination. However, in regions where a problem exists with respect to the provision of frequencies for operational control purposes, it may be advantageous if States endeavour to coordinate the requirements of aircraft operating agencies for such channels prior to regional meetings.
4.1.8.2 The frequencies that may be allotted for use in the aeronautical mobile (R) service in a particular region shall be limited to the number determined as being necessary for operational needs in the region.
Note.— The number of frequencies required in a particular region is normally determined by the Council on the recommendations of Regional Air Navigation Meetings. The capabilities of VHF airborne equipment known to be widely used in the region will be taken into account in this determination.
APPENDIX TO CHAPTER 4. LIST OF ASSIGNABLE FREQUENCIES
|Frequency | |Annotations |Frequency | |Annotations |
|(MHz) | | |(MHz) | | |
|121.5 | |Emergency frequency |121.95 | |Reserved for aerodrome surface |
|123.1 | |Auxiliary frequency SAR |121.625 | |communications |
|121.60 | | |121.675 | |[see Table 4-1, Item c)] |
|121.65 | | |121.725 | | |
|121.70 | |Reserved for aerodrome surface |121.775 | | |
|121.75 | |communications |121.825 | | |
|121.80 | |[see Table 4-1, Item c)] |121.875 | | |
|121.85 | | |121.925 | | |
|121.90 | | |121.975 | | |
| | | | | | |
|GROUP A |
|Frequencies (MHz) |
|118.00 |
|118.10 |
|118.20 |
|118.30 |
|118.40 |
|118.50 |
|118.60 |
|118.70 |
|118.80 |
|118.05 |
|118.15 |
|118.25 |
|118.35 |
|118.45 |
|118.55 |
|118.65 |
|118.75 |
|118.85 |
|132.00 |
|132.05 |
|132.10 |
|132.15 |
|132.20 |
|132.25 |
|132.30 |
|132.025 |
|132.075 |
|132.125 |
|132.175 |
|132.225 |
|132.275 |
|132.325 |
|132.375 |
|132.425 |
|132.475 |
|118.025 |
|118.075 |
|118.125 |
|118.175 |
|118.225 |
|118.275 |
|118.325 |
|118.375 |
|118.425 |
|118.475 |
|118.525 |
|118.575 |
|118.625 |
|118.675 |
|118.725 |
|118.775 |
|118.825 |
|118.875 |
|118.000 – 121.400 in 8.33 kHz steps |121.600 – 123.050 in 8.33 kHz steps |123.150 – 136.475 in 8.33 kHz steps |
List A – assignable frequencies for 25 kHz channel spacing
118.000 – 121.450 MHz in 25 kHz steps
121.550 – 123.050 MHz in 25 kHz steps
123.150 – 136.975 MHz in 25 kHz steps
Loftur to amend with reduced channel spacing
List B – assignable frequencies for 8.33 kHz channel spacing
118.000 – 121.450 MHz in 8.33 kHz steps
121.550 – 123.050 MHz in 8.33 kHz steps
123.150 – 136.975 MHz in 8.33 kHz steps
Loftur to amend with reduced channel spacing
Note: in the frequency bands between 121.400 – 121.600 MHz, 123.050 – 123.150 MHz and 136.457 – 137 MHz frequency assignments with 8.33 kHz channel spacing are not permitted
Loftur to amend with reduced channel spacing
_______
_______________
APPENDIX E
Comments on the new Volume II of Doc. 9718
1. Cross references in the document will be amended to be automatically updated
2. References to specific Regions in the document will be removed to keep the document as generic as possible.
3. Below the Title of Volume II the following introductory text will be inserted:
This part of the Handbook is intended to assist States in frequency assignment planning for aeronautical communication and navigation systems.
The approval of frequency assignment planning criteria rests with the Regions and should be based on the provisions of Annex 10 and relevant regional air navigation agreements.
4. The formula in paragraph 1.3, Step 1b will be amended as follows:
Replace yy by s, xx by e and yy = xx² 10-12 / 120π by s = e² 10-12 / 120π
5. The Note below formula (1a) will be amended to “… the service volume than this the approach in Step 1a (Generic Method)”.
6. In the paragraph starting with “In aeronautical frequency assignment planning etc.” below formula (1b) the expression “LRxFL=-3dB” will be amended in “LRxFL=3 dB” (sign change)
7. Formula (2) is not correct: FDR should enter the formula with minus sign.
8. Amend paragraph 1.1.1 into:
1.1.1 This chapter describes a general methodology, which can be used in interference analysis for different radio systems. […]and frequency separation for an acceptable (agreed) interference level. However, some part of this methodology may not be directly applicable for defining frequency assignment planning criteria due to the lack of information on some system parameters.
9. Amend formula (13) to read:
I/N = Pu – 10. log k.T0 – 10.log BIF – NF
10. Just above Figure 1-3, amend the introductory text as follows:
The standard propagation model calculates the propagation loss along the radio path as follow. It has to be noted that this description only considers the transmitter location and assumes that the height of the receiver is at sea level.
11. Just above formula (18) modify the introductory text to read:
The distance to the radio horizon (i.e. the maximum radio line-of-sight distance between two points, given their respective heights) can be calculated using the following formula
12. Just below Figure 1-5 modify the text into:
In order to protect (aircraft) station a from interference from (aircraft) station b (with the same characteristics as in 1.3.4.1), Lb(dU) needs in this example to be 142.6 dB
13. Paragraph 1.3.4.2, at the very end, delete from the Note the vey last sentence (Implementation of the 14 dB …).
14. The meeting noted that the propagation curves in Appendix A will be updated with the latest revision of ITU-R Recommendation P.528
15. The meeting agreed to delete Appendices B and C from the document.
16. The meeting agreed to retain Appendices E and G.
APPENDIX F
WG-F/25 Flimsy 06 rev4
14 October 2011
Guidelines for member states towards WRC-12 Agenda Item 1.7
1. Background
The 25th meeting of the Working Group F considered the interim report of the Correspondence Group dealing with WRC-12 Agenda Item 1.7 including discussions on three major issues identified (WP12) as well as outcomes of the CPM report, ITU-R WP 4C and regional preparatory groups relating to Agenda Item 1.7 (IP3 to 6).
The Working Group decided to provide guidelines for member states towards WRC-12 Agenda Item 1.7 to explain interest of aviation group in the Conference.
2. Discussions
ICAO position on this agenda item is “to support further regulatory provisions to strengthen AMS(R)S access to the bands 1 545 - 1 555 MHz and 1 646.5 -1 656.5 MHz including, if required, changes to No. 5.357A, No. 5.362A and Resolution 222”. Accordingly ICAO supports method B of the CPM report to WRC-12. The work ongoing in regional preparatory groups shows that modifications will be discussed in WRC-12 and in particular the role of ICAO.
2.1 Method B could be further improved to ease some concerns made by MSS operators and to strengthen current MSS frequency coordination process by applying following principles explicitly as far as possible.
(1) AMS(R)S spectrum requirements shall be calculated under agreed methodology developed in ITU-R. and validated objectively through an expert group
(2) Priority shall be given to satisfy validated spectrum requirements for AMS(R)S communications at the MSS frequency coordination meetings such as assigning AMS(R)S spectrum prior to other MSS networks (cf. RR. 5.357A)
(3) AMS(R)S spectrum shall be assigned by confirming compatibility with other MSS networks in all geographic areas including for other coordination groups.
(4) Sufficient transparency, especially for the process to satisfy priority access of required spectrum for the AMS(R)S communications in the frequency coordination shall be provided by the publication of a report about the spectrum finally accommodated for AMS(R)S with respect to the spectrum requirements submitted.
2.2 To achieve principle (1), in the process of determining AMS(R)S spectrum requirements, input parameters and their conditions are important and critical, therefore they are to be presented based on reliable sources which ITU-R members would recognize.
ICAO will participate in the process of determining AMS(R)S spectrum requirements by validating communications traffic data brought to ICAO by AMS(R)S operators.
These AMS(R)S communications traffics data could be defined by a special group organized by ICAO.
2.3 It is noted that the ICAO role is not to participate directly in the frequency coordination process, since frequency coordination is a subject to the notifying administrations concerned according to Radio Regulations, and therefore individual matters such as results, details of discussions and conditions agreed are to be kept as confidential. However, procedures to ensure spectrum for the AMS(R)S communications should be as transparent as possible to satisfy interest of aviation community since it is relating to safety of public transportation.
2.4 ICAO intend to participate in the work of developing ITU-R Recommendation to calculate/validate AMS(R)S spectrum requirements relating to principle (1) after the Conference mainly in the area of estimating aviation communication traffics
3. Conclusion
ICAO member states are encouraged to consider these guidelines towards WRC-12 Agenda Item 1.7, and to ask their respective telecommunication Administrations to reflect above principles to the discussions in the Conference.
Contents of the Section 2 may be used as elements of the information paper from the ICAO to the WRC-12.
APPENDIX G
Flimsy on the coordination mechanism proposed by ICAO
for AMS(R)S in the 5030-5091 MHz
In February 2011, the ITU-R Conference Preparatory Meeting (CPM11-2) finalized the CPM textReport, summarizing the ITU-R studies performed in preparation for WRC-12 and containing potential methods for the solution of the various WRC-12 Agenda Items (AIs). In the CPM text Report for AI 1.3 (UAS) it is was proposed to study a potential modification of the regulatory status of an the existing allocation to AMS(R)S in the 5GHz band, if a new allocation to AM(R)S is made at WRC-12 in the band 5 030-5 091 MHz.
Since the CPM11-2 the ICAO position for WRC-12, in particular the background text on AI 1.3, has was been updated and now indicated that the existing coordination mechanism for AMS(R)S in the 5030 – 5091 MHz band (RR 9.21) should be reviewed and perhaps replaced.
This proposed modification to the coordination mechanism will would not affect the regulatory criterion (frequency overlap) today in place under RR 9.21 coordination threshold to protect MLS from AMS(R)S transmitting space stations in the band 5 030-5 091 MHz. As confirmed by NSP SSG, the MLS receiver performance is met when the MLS operates in the condition described in annex 10 volume 1 attachment G section 7.24.1.1 and interference from undesired signals is received at a level not exceeding -124.5 dBW/m² at the MLS receiver antenna.
Furthermore in case a new AM(R)S allocation is would be made in the 5030 - 5091 MHz band at the next WRC-12, it this band would still continue to be an "aeronautical safety" a frequency band exclusively used by aeronautical safety services, containing only internationally standardized aeronautical systems, as specified in the ICAO SARPs contained in Annex 10 to the Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation. the MLS will keep its firstthe highest priority in the band through (RR 5.444). Therefore, the appropriate sharing conditions would be determined within the ICAO when developing the relevant SARPs for AM(R)S and AMS(R)S and coordination of the sharing by the relevant aeronautical systems would take place within aviation community.
In order to give provide a balanced coordination mechanism between the AMS(R)S and the new AM(R)S, if such AM(R)S allocation is madeany, the adequate and sufficient proposal is to change replace the existing RR 9.21 coordination mechanism by the RR 9.11A for AMS(R)S to in the band 5030 - 5091 MHz band.
APPENDIX H
Clarification to ICAO ACP/WG-F on SESAR LDACS development
1) LDCAS1 / LDACS2 developments:
The SJU is evaluating the future options and a decision on the way ahead will be taken soon.
2) LDACS COM and Spectrum requirements
The selected LDACS system will need to meet future COM requirements and ensure that the system will fit in the band 960-1164 MHz and will comply to provisions proposed in WRC12 AI.1.4. WG-F should be involved in the evaluation of impact to DME and other existing systems.
3) LDACS Compatibility Studies
The compatibility studies related to LDACS 1& 2 versus NAV systems using real LDACS hardware have not yet started.
4) LDACS is an essential enabler for SESAR
LDACS, together with SATCOM, is identified as a key component of the Future Communication Infrastructure. The SESAR Concept is based on the sharing of the 4D Business Trajectory between the cockpit and the ATM ground systems, which will require a very high speed and safe AMRS link(s) which cannot be realized with the current ATM technologies.
5) LDACS is not intended as a regional (European) development.
LDACS will be proposed to ICAO for endorsement. ICAO (ACP WGW) is kept up to date and FAA is directly involved with the SESAR partners as part of the USA-Europe Coordination Plan 4.4.
6) LDACS standardisation
SESAR will need to complete first the evaluation of candidate LDACS systems before making a proposal to initiate standardisation within ICAO. This is not expected before 2014.
7) LDACS Deployment
The timing for LDACS initial deployment will have to be synchronised with the operational needs for such high performing data link.
APPENDIX I
Responce by WG F to FMG Comments/Questions on the Proposed Replacement Text for
Attachment A to Annex 10 Volume V
1) Agreement needs to be reached on what assumptions are taken into account in the calculations. Should we include allowances for variations in propagation conditions, antenna variations etc
2) Agreement needs to be reached on the propagation model(s) to be used. The FMG would either suggest waiting for the results of the ITU SG 3 activities on ITU-R P.528 or consider another model such as IF 77. Points to be considered are ground antenna height, time probability to be applied for the desired and undesired signals, whether a general beyond line of sight value can be applied and cross polarisation attenuation etc.
3) Section 2.1 a) It is suggests to not specifically reference EUR for 14 dB but use similar wording to the wording in Volume V chapter 4 referring to areas of congestion for 14 dB
4) Section 2.1.b) The minimum field strength at the airborne receiver is quoted as 75µV/m (37.5 dBµV/m) but the old attachment quoted 45 dBµV/m. The 45 dBµV/m was assumed to equate to a 95% probability of achieving the 37.5 dBµV/m in accordance with nakagami/Rice distribution thus equating to the on a high percentage of occasions as required in Annex 10 Volume III. What should be taken?
5) Section 2.1 The proposed Attachment A introduces the use of the received power which has not been used before and the conversion of field strength to received power makes a number of assumptions(e.g. the antenna is a perfect isotropic antenna) about the performance of the antenna and this could be misleading. The FMG would suggest to remove these figures and refer only to the field strength.
6) Section 2.1 The old Attachment A made reference to a 10 dB variation in antenna gain should we also include this here and if not why not. Also are there any other factors we need to consider?
7) Use of the terms Designated Operational Range and Designated Operational Height appear to be redundant with a correctly worded definition of Designated Operational Coverage and could be
confusing and hence it is proposed to at least remove the definition of these terms.
8) Section 2.2 Is this text required as it appears to be repeated in section 3.1.
9) Section 3.1.
- There appears to be an assumption that all services are circular around the ground transmitter. This is not always the case, in Europe certainly a significant number of services have a DOC that is defined by a polygon and hence planning for these services should also be reflected in Attachment A
- It is proposed that for each type of scenario the full set of equations is provided that reflect the planning criteria given in section 4 of Annex 10 Volume V and that those equations reflect all of the factors that need to be taken into account.
- A 5:1 distance ratio is one specific case of 14 dB D/U ratio where both the wanted and unwanted transmitters are of equal power. This is very rarely the case and hence the formulas used should be more generic and that the note refers to the fact that if the transmitter powers are the same then this can be simplified to 5:1 although this is still dangerous given the potential need to take account of antenna variations.
-----------------------
The meeting agreed to delete Attachment A to Annex 10 Volume V. All material proposed as guidance material for incorporation in this |Annex is already contained in the guidance material of the Handbook Volume II. A proper reference in the SARPs (Section 4.1 of Annex 10, Volume V) is necessary.
Therefore, the comments as provided below would rather refer to the relevant sections of the Handbook, Volume II.
The meeting agreed to use for frequency assignment planning the Aeronautical Standard Propagation Model as provided in 1.3. 3 in the Handbook, Volume II which is based on free space propagation only.
The meeting also noted that further consideration should be given to the need for applying airborne antenna variations as provided for in in the various calculation in Chapter 2 of Volume 2 of the Handbook.
Mr. Mettrop offered to provide, for further review by WG F, further material on this issue.
With regard to the propagation model to be used, see comments under #1.
The work in progress on ITU R P.528 (aeronautical propagation curves) and on using the IF 77 model would affect further detail that would assist in designing and implementing air/ground communication systems, but would not affect the frequency assignment planning criteria based on the Aeronautical Standard Propagation Model.
Specific references to Europe using 14 dB D/U| ratio for frequency assignment planning for VHF air/ground communication systems will be replaced with a more generic statement.
The meeting agreed that the minimum fieldstrength (signals-in-space) of 75µV/m as mentioned in Annex 10, Volume III should be used –˜) - . / 0 Y [ a b h i x y | } ~ ¦ § Ñ ø þ ÿ [pic]!
#
üôüôðôüÝÓÇÓ¸«?‘Œ„ü{ürürk¸rücüYh—úaJmHsHhöäh—ú5?
h—ú5?aJh—ú5?CJaJh—ú5?CJaJh×nRh—ú5? h—ú5?h×nRh—ú5?mH sH h×nRh—ú5?aJmH sH h—ú5?CJOJ[?]QJ[?]^J[?]h—as the fieldstrength to be protected from harmful interference.
The Chairman of the EUR FMG (Mr. Mettrop) would raise the matter of the need for applying in some cases another value (e.g. 45 dBµV/m) in the EUR FMG.
This comment is no longer relevant since Attachment A is proposed to be deleted from Annex 10
See comment under #1 above..
Throughout the Handbook, the term Designated Operational Range and Designated Operational Height will be replaced with maximum Range or Maximum Height in the context of using the term “Frequency Protected Service Volume” as will be incorporated in the SARPs
This comment is no longer relevant since Attachment A is proposed to be deleted from Annex 10
This issue has been covered by the replacement of the term DOC throughout the Handbook with frequency protected service volume. In a definition it will be clarified that this volume can be either circular or a polygon.
The full set of equations is in the Handbook.
The formulas in the Handbook relating to a 145 dB D/U protection ratio will be modified to include the effect of variations in transmitter power. This will be considered at a future WG F meeting.
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.