Annex 15, Amdt. 38, Ch 6. The Pro’s and Cons’ of Thematic Data Sets

1. Annex 15, Amdt. 38, Ch 6. The Pro’s and Cons’ of Thematic Data Sets

2. FR - easier for providers to implement; UK – less costly on industry to fund; ECTL -Well tailored to the needs of the commercial data publishers; ECTL - Cheaper for AIS/States; ECTL - Might strengthen the business case for SWIM-compliant services (query/reply, notification, etc.); some could be value-added. Single Data Set – Pro’s

3. FR - Too far reaching (all data needs to be available) - little room for stepped approach; FR - The single dataset may in practice be made of different data sets (eg AIP data + terrain data + eTOD) because of practical aspects (size, format, etc.); FR - How do we deal with existing provisions (eTOD and AMDB) ?; Single Data Set – Con’s 1.

4. SV - The State has a responsibility to provide information, to make it available in only single datasets will decrease the accessibility compared with the situation today UK - There may be three data sets, AIP, Terrain An Obstacle. UK – Costs of refining single data set lie with 3rd party providers. Single Data Set – Con’s 2.

5. ECTL - Other users will need to filter out a lot of unnecessary data; ECTL - Against the current general IT/Internet trends of providing just what is required and not to dump (and overload) all; ECTL - Band-width and file processing problems due to files that can be several hundreds of MB in size;  ECTL - Data in datasets will not be provided in a single format (e.g. terrain and topography in geofile and obstacles/AIP in AIXM Single Data Set – Con’s 3.

6. FR - Continuity with current Annex 15 (at least for eTOD and AMDBs); FR - Easier for the users to get data of immediate interest; FR - In line with a stepped approach: terrain and obstacle data can be a "shall" since it is already one in the current SARPs, other data sets may be "shoulds" first then "upgraded to shalls“; FR -The updates may be more relevant per theme than globally (eg nav data update do not imapct terrain, obstacles, etc.). Thematic Data Set – Pro’s 1.

7. SV - Digital data distribution is the best way to decrease the costs in the AIS production and thematic datasets are more adopted to individual user needs; UK - More choice for bulk data users in industry; ECTL - Better fits the needs of individual users (e.g. ATC does not need all); ECTL - Easier to deal with the current Standard/Recommended Practice provisions of e.g. ETOD/AMDB ; ECTL - Gives the possibility to AIS to understand who and how is using the digital data.  Thematic Data Set – Pro’s 2.

8. FR - Puts some constraints on providers (multiple data sets to be released every AIRAC cycle); UK - Benefits e.g. costs savings will not be passed on to the end user; UK - More costs on industry; Thematic Data Set – Con’s 1.

9. ECTL - More work for AIS  ECTL - More work for this group also to investigate the needs of the various groups and to identify the data set content  ECTL - Might weaken the business case for value added value services , such as on-line query/reply services   Thematic Data Set – Con’s 2.

10. SV - From a flight safety perspective it is important that datasets are available in a format that fits the needs of individual users and without extra charges; UK - Thematic data sets could only be a recommendation and introduced in a phased approach; ECTL - It is suggested to limit the number of thematic datasets and to provide guidance on how to provide filter-query functionality (to avoid 200 different implementations) Other Comments

11. Questions