40 likes | 148 Views
En-Route Working Group Plenary Report. 25 Sept 2013. End-to-End definition work. Two telecons since DCIT-26, and ½ day working session 9/25 Work continues on two Service Descriptions Established firmer timeline target: DCIT-29 (December 4-5)
E N D
En-Route Working GroupPlenary Report 25 Sept 2013
End-to-End definition work • Two telecons since DCIT-26, and ½ day working session 9/25 • Work continues on two Service Descriptions • Established firmer timeline target: DCIT-29 (December 4-5) • Critical path need for this timeline: more detailed documentation for NSDA, log-on, CPDLC set-up and tear-down • Other detailed documents as available, with full understanding of changing status • Transfer of Comm / Initial Contact, including Log-on, etc. • Target final draft, DCIT-28 (October 30-31) • Began to fold-in flight plan filing, log-on and CPDLC set-up • Agreed to remove requirement for 24-bit filing in the FPL for FANS-1/A(+) aircraft • Identified issues for further examination • Systematic notification of current ATC Unit using freetext uplink • Notification of CPDLC on/off freetext uplink • Route clearances (Go Button, Controller-initiated Reroutes, Direct-to-Fix, Tailored Arrivals, Crossing Constraints) • Stabilizing the Tailored Arrivals End-to-End, for conversion to generic Routes • Action: Tracing of documents from DCIT to/from FAA doc’s
Messages • Message set distributed by John G. (FAA En-Route Lead) • Preliminary feedback provided on a few messages that needed to be added to initial set • John to give “by-service” message allocation today at Plenary for future work • En-route validation planning provided by John • Summary at Plenary
Validation and Trials • DCIT stated that the validation plan has value, including the interoperability-level trials … however • DCIT views the non-integrated interoperability-level trials, in isolation • Not at all equivalent to operational-level trials so essential to successful DCL deployment • DCIT foresees significant risk for realization of an operationally useable deployment • Could negatively impact industry engagement in trials, depending on scope • Emphasized that DCIT members emphatically endorse and share the Program’s focus on meeting schedule for IOC; nobody wants a slip • Emphasized that DCIT members understand and will respect need to contain requirements creep • Results of trials post requirements lock-down have value for procedures, a/c updates, etc. • Agreed that we should continue to define explicit objectives for both the proposed interoperability level trials, and for operational-level trials • Will bring to Data Comm Program