1
FSMP WG-F/32 WP14/
International Civil Aviation Organization
WORKING PAPER / FSMP (ACP)-WG-F/32 WP-14
2015-02-12
32ndMeetingof Working Group F
of the Frequency Spectrum Management Panel (FSMP)
(formerly of the Aeronautical Communications Panel)
(FSMP WG-F/32)
(Cairo, Egypt February18-24, 2015)
Agenda Item 7 / Development of potential updates to ICAO WRC-15 PositionProposed Modifications to the ICAO Position on WRC-15 AI 1.5
(Presented by John Mettrop)
SUMMARYThis paper is an undated proposal for modifications to the ICAO position on WRC-15 agenda item 1.5.
ACTION
It is proposed that the ICAO position for the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) World Radiocommunication Conference 2015 (WRC-15) is amended as indicated in the Annex to this document.
1.INTRODUCTION
1.1The current ICAO Position on issues of interest to international civil aviation to be decided at the 2015 ITU World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC-15) can be found in Attachment Bto ICAO State Letter E 3/5.15-13/57 dated 2 July 2013. This paper proposes some modifications to the ICAO Position on WRC-15 Agenda Item 1.5 as it appears in that document.
2.discussion
2.1Since the development of the ICAO position for the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) World Radiocommunication Conference 2015 (WRC-15) on agenda item 1.5 significant progress has been made with the studies. As a result it would be useful to modify the ICAO position on WRC-15 agenda item 1.5 in order to reflect the information currently available and focus on the higher priority issues.
2.2The revision also reflects the information provided by the ITU secretariat in response to working paper 6 from the last meeting of the group.
3.ACTION BY THE MEETING
3.1The ACP WG F is invited to:
Modify the ICAO position for the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) World Radiocommunication Conference 2015 (WRC-15) as indicated in the Annex to this document
ANNEX
WRC-15 agenda item 1.5
Agenda Item Title:
To consider the use of frequency bands allocated to the fixed-satellite service not subject to Appendices30, 30A and30B for the control and non-payload communications of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) in non-segregated airspaces, in accordance with Resolution 153 (WRC12);
Discussion:
ICAO Standardised systems to that support the safe and efficient operation of aircraft operations on a global basis are developed in accordance with the provisions of the ITU Radio Regulations. In line with the strategic objective identified in Recommendation 1/12 Of significant importance to aviation is that the frequency bands that support radio communication and navigation for aircraft are need to operate in a frequency band allocated to a recognized safety services (such as thee.g. AM(R)S, the AMS(R)S or the ARNS).
This agenda item calleds for studies to determine whether a system operating under an allocation to the Fixed Satellite Service (FSS), which is regarded as a non-safety service, can be used to support unmanned aircraft system (UAS[1]) control and non-payload communications (CNPC[2]) which has been determined to be a safety application. If such use is found feasible, then any resultant technical and regulatory actions should be limited to the case of UAS using satellites, as studied, and not set a precedent that puts other aeronautical safety services at risk.
The Twelfth Air Navigation Conference (AN-Conf/12) was held in November 2012, and the main theme was to redraft the global Air Navigation Plan based on the concept of Aviation System Block Upgrades (ASBU). Worldwide ICAO Air Navigation Conferences are held approximately every 10 years, and their primary goal is to establish and promote a common vision or path to ensure a safe, coherent and harmonized modernization of the Air Transport System. There was substantive discussion on spectrum, resulting in two AN-Conf/12 Recommendations (1/12 and 1/13) relevant to this WRC-15 agenda item.
At WRC-12 no new satellite allocations were made to support beyond-line-of-sight (BLOS) UAS CNPC. However the aeronautical mobile satellite (R) service (AMS(R)S) in the frequency range 5000-5150 MHz, previously allocated through footnote 5.367, is now a table allocation and the co-ordination requirements in the frequency band 5030-5091 MHz were changed from 9.21 to 9.11A.
The requirement for BLOS (satellite) communications (54MHz)of between 54 & 165 MHz cannot necessarily be fulfilled in the limited spectrum available (1.5/1.6/5 GHz) especially if an in the frequency bands 1.5/1.6GHz, and no AMS(R)S satellite system is not launched currently operates in the frequency range 5000-5150 MHz to support current/near-term UAS CNPC.
Existing systems operating in the FSS in the unplanned frequency bands 4/6GHz, 12/14GHz and 20/30GHz have spectrum capacity available that can meet the requirements for BLOS communications and could be used for UAS CNPC provided that the principles detailed below are fulfilled. However the FSS is not recognised in the ITU as a safety service. Some of these systems have been notified for registration under article 11.41.
Studies within the ITU have provided information on the radio link availability/continuity/reliability that can be achieved by an FSS satellite. However these figures need to be converted to figures that relate to satellite system from the message input to message reception so that they can be compared with ICAO requirements noting that ICAO requirements have yet to be defined. Therefore, from a technical perspective, for the time being whether FSS systems could support UAS CNPC cannot be determined.
Whilst a definitive determination cannot be made as to whether the performance of an FSS system can support UAS CNPC, the radio regulatory issue can be addressed. Operation of UAS CNPC under an allocation to the FSS without any additional provision in the Radio Regulations allowing the UA earth stations to communicate with FSS stations (e.g. through a footnote) would be inconsistent with Article 1 definitions, in particular of the fixed satellite service (No. 1.21) and aircraft station (No. 1.84). Such a situation would in effect mean that the UAS would be considered to be operating on a non-interference/non-protected basis. However if additional provision(s) were introduced into the Radio Regulations then the earth station on-board the UA could be considered to be part of the FSS but this would require a “supporting” allocation in the appropriate frequency band that is consistent with Article 1 definitions. Therefore even to operate under an allocation to the FSS there would be a requirement for the relevant frequency band to be allocated to the aeronautical mobile satellite service in order to maintain consistency within the Radio Regulations.
As previously mentioned FSS is not considered within the ITU as a safety service and the definition of an aircraft earth station requires it to operate in the aeronautical mobile satellite service which is not a subset of the FSS. Therefore from a regulatory perspective an aircraft earth station operating in the FSS would be operating on a non-protected non-interference basis which is not consistent with a safety service and hence operation under the FSS is not feasible.
Of the two methods proposed in the Conference Preparatory Meeting text the method that could be support is no change however this does not address the spectrum requirement identified and hence if another method could be identified either at this WRC or the next that allowed the frequency bands considered under this agenda item that is in line with the need for an allocation to a safety service then it could be supported
Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) for CNPC are developed in ICAO. CNPC links must meet specific Required Communications Performance (RCP) to satisfy the aviation safety requirements as identified during this development. UAS CNPC links operated on frequencies in FSS allocations would have to be validated to meet those SARPs. Command and Control communication (C2) requirements should be differentiated from ATC communications requirements since technical and operational constraints, as well as technological solutions, may differ. Actual UAS operations with satellite-based CNPC systems using FSS allocations are performed to date in segregated airspace. This gives some indication that FSS satellite systems operating in the frequency bands 4/6GHz, 12/14GHz and 20/30GHz may have the capability of supporting UAS CNPC in non-segregated airspace as well. However regulatory measures will be required to address the conditions for UA CNPC links. In addition regulatory measures will be required to address some of the safety related conditions as detailed below.
AMS(R)S is the appropriate type of service allocation to support the satellite component for UAS command and control and ATC relay in non-segregated airspace. However, WRC-15 AI 1.5 asks for studies for the use of FSS allocations for UAS applications.
Article 15 of the Radio Regulations states that special consideration shall be given to avoiding interference on distress and safety frequencies.
In order to satisfy the radio regulatory requirements for BLOS communications for UAS, the use of satellite CNPC links will have to comply with the following conditions:
1That UAS CNPC needs to operate under a primary allocation to the AMS(R)S or a clear identification of the use of a parent allocation by AMS(R)S.
2That the technical and regulatory actions should be limited to the case of UAS using satellites, as studied, and not set a precedent that puts other aeronautical safety services at risk.
2That all frequency bands which carry aeronautical safety communications need to be clearly identified in the Radio Regulations.
3That the assignments and use of the relevant frequency bands have to be consistent with article 4.10 of the Radio Regulations which recognizes that safety services require special measures to ensure their freedom from harmful interference.
4Knowledge that any assignment operating in those frequency bands:
–is in conformity with technical criteria of the Radio Regulations,
–has been successfully co-ordinated, including cases where co-ordination was not completed but the ITU examination of probability of harmful interference resulted in favourable finding, or any caveats placed on that assignment have been addressed and resolved such that the assignment is able to satisfy the requirements to provide BLOS communications for UAS; and
–has been recorded in the International Master Frequency Register.
5That interference to systems is reported in a transparent manner and addressed in the appropriate timescale.
6That realistic worst case conditions, including an appropriate safety margin, can be applied during compatibility studies.
7That any operational considerations for UAS will be handled in ICAO and not in the ITU.
ICAO Position:
Unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) have great potential for innovative civil applications, provided that their operation does not introduce risks to the safety of life.
Taking into account the Twelfth Air Navigation Conference (November 2012)Recommendations 1/12 “That ICAO … develop and implement a comprehensive aviation frequency spectrum strategy … which includes the following objectives: … clearly state in the strategy the need for aeronautical systems to operate in spectrum allocated to an appropriate aeronautical safety service”; and Recommendation1/13, asamended by the 38th Assembly, of the Twelfth Air Navigation Conference (November 2012) “That ICAO … develop and implement a comprehensive aviation frequency spectrum strategy … which includes the following objectives: … clearly state in the strategy the need for aeronautical systems to operate in spectrum allocated to an appropriate aeronautical safety service”; and “That ICAO should support studies in the International Telecommunication Union Radio Communication Sector (ITU-R) to ensure that the safety of life concerns could be sufficiently addressed. The outcome of these studies would have to provide the necessary assurance that there were no undue implications for other aeronautical systems. Provided this was the case, then it could be determined what ITU regulatory actions would be required to enable use of frequency bands allocated to the fixed-satellite service (FSS) for RPAS command and control links to ensure consistency with ICAO technical and regulatory requirements for a safety service.support studies in the International Telecommunication Union Radio Communication Sector (ITU-R) to determine what ITU regulatory actions are required to enable use of frequency bands allocated to the fixed satellite service for remotely piloted aircraft system command and control (C2) links to ensure consistency with ICAO technical and regulatory requirements for a safety service.”, in order to support the use of FSS systems for UAS CNPC links in non-segregated airspace, the technical and regulatory actions identified by studies under Resolution 153 (WRC-12) must be consistent with the above Recommendations, and satisfy the following conditions:
1.That UAS CNPC needs to operate under a primary allocation to the AMS(R)S or a clear identification of the use of a parent allocation by AMS(R)S.
2.That the technical and regulatory actions should be limited to the case of UAS using satellites, as studied, and not set a precedent that puts other aeronautical safety services at risk.
2.That all frequency bands which carry aeronautical safety communications need to be clearly identified in the Radio Regulations.
3.That the assignments and use of the relevant frequency bands have to be consistent with article 4.10 of the Radio Regulations which recognizes that safety services require special measures to ensure their freedom from harmful interference.
4.Knowledge that any assignment operating in those frequency bands:
–is in conformity with technical criteria of the Radio Regulations,
–has been successfully co-ordinated, including cases where co-ordination was not completed but the ITU examination of probability of harmful interferenceresulted in a favourable finding, or any caveats placed on that assignment have been addressed and resolved such that the assignment is able to satisfy the requirements to provide BLOS communications for UAS; and
–has been recorded in the International Master Frequency Register.
5.That interference to systems is reported in a transparent manner and addressed in the appropriate timescale.
6.That realistic worst case conditions, including an appropriate safety margin, can be applied during compatibility studies.
7.That any operational considerations for UAS will be handled in ICAO and not in the ITU.
[1]UAS is referred to in ICAO as Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (RPAS)
[2]CNPC is referred to in ICAO as Command and Control (C2) or Command, Control and ATC Communications (C3).