1 / 9

RTCA SC-214/ EUROCAE WG78

RTCA SC-214/ EUROCAE WG78. CPDLC OSA/OPA Status. CPDLC OSA Status. Latest draft version I distributed to CSG/VSG on 19 Sept 2011 Major changes in 19 Sept 2011 version Draft of Oceanic SRs Integrated into the CPDLC OSA from DO-306/ED122

gwyn
Download Presentation

RTCA SC-214/ EUROCAE WG78

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. RTCA SC-214/EUROCAE WG78 CPDLC OSA/OPA Status

  2. CPDLC OSA Status • Latest draft version I distributed to CSG/VSG on 19 Sept 2011 • Major changes in 19 Sept 2011 version • Draft of Oceanic SRs Integrated into the CPDLC OSA from DO-306/ED122 • need to handle SC-214 SRs that do not directly match DO-306/ED122 SRs • FIM safety analysis added • Graphical D-TAXI added • Addition of FT for Hazard OH-CPDLC-2 (Severity 4) “Loss of Service for Multiple Aircraft” • Changes to FTs for hazards OH-CPDLC-3 through 6 (FTs for OH-CPDLC-7 through 9 still need work) • Wim and Todd made further refinements to FTs and SR tables for Hazards OH-CPDLC-3 through OH-CPDLC-5 on 27 September 2011

  3. CPDLC OSA Status (Cont.) • Major changes in 19 Sept 2011 version (Cont.) • Simplified human quantitative assumptions and provided better supporting evidence [CARA – controller; System Safety … - Flight Crew] added in an Appendix • Used for FT allocations only • Only qualitative requirements on humans in SRs • Relevant changes to SRs based on changes to FTs (not all changes to SRs have been reflected in the summary of SRs at the end) • Some of this has been done but not a full scrub yet • Bottom Line: no major changes to SRs so far • Better explanation of unit conversions used in FTs/SRs has been added using a realistic scenario (2 hour domestic flight) • PDRs are 90% aligned with current changes to OSA; will add PDRs for other changes as soon as possible

  4. CPDLC OSA Work to be Done • Add tracing of SRs to ATS functions • Recently discussed (on 27 Sept 2011) and found that all SRs apply to all ATS functions except for two SRs: one specifically for DCL and one specifically for Graphical D-TAXI • Therefore do not see need for separate table of SRs per ATS function • Perform review of ASOR (FTs and SRs) for hazards OH-CPDLC-6,7,8, and 9 • OSA Integration: Find other requirements (ORs, IRs, etc.) for the “Category 3” SC-214 SRs that do not directly match up with DO-306/ED122 SRs that can be considered equivalent • Check LWCE calculated for each hazard from estimated probabilities of Basic Causes through FT/ET to effect (for FAA ATO SMS use) • This is a check of acceptable safety risk for FAA ATO • Check to see if changes in CDPLC OSA affect 4DTRAD OSA

  5. CPDLC OPA Status • Latest Version Draft OPA version I released is dated 13 September 2011 • Workwasfocusedon getting the RCP specificationscorrect in the spirit of GOLD and to smooth the integrationwith the Oceanicside • Completededitorialimprovements (RSP definitions, ATS functions, etc.) • Completed RCP specificationsfor CPDLC and D-FIS • Partiallycompleted RSP specifications for ADS-C • TheOceanic-based RCP240D and RCP400/D data from GOLD needs to addedto CPDLC OPA

  6. OPA Issues • Confirm choice of RCP for FIM • Do weneedPerformance specificationsfor DLIC? It iscurrentlyincluded, but thereis no ATS functionbehindit. • RCP60 for CPDLC wasremoved • currentthoughtisthat CPDLC is not suitable to bethattight and have observedopposition from pilots. Is this the right conclusion? • ThreeRCP types are needed to cover the various Continental ATS functions. • Are 3 differenttts times (ACC Comms, Complex Route, 4DTRAD) manageable for an En-route centre? • Do weneed to differentiatebetweencomplex route clearance outside 4D TBO contextwith RCP180 and complex route clearance used in 4D TBO with RCP300? • Can weeliminate RCP180?

  7. OPA Issues (Cont.) • All allocations are requirements, includingtimes for the INITIATOR.However, a performance requirement on controllerand pilot are rathercontroversialwhenitcomes to Opsapproval. Appropriatewordingisrequired on its intention of the INIT times to takeaway the concerns of Operators and airframemanufacturers. A complicating factor: thereis not yet a description of a representative HMI and Ops scenario to guide the certification body.   Question: How do weprovide guidance on certification of human performance times?

  8. OPA Issues (Cont.) • Specified 99.9% probability for RCTP(aircraft), RCTP(ATSU), RCTP(ACSP). This issuitable for monitoring the performance throughoutitslifetime. However, itisverydifficult to show 99.9% compliancebefore a system is in operational use (requires10,000 exchanges to get a pretty stable picture). It wasmentioned once to alsospecifythe 99% value to easecompliance for airframe/avionicsmanufacturers. What are yourideas? • In continental airspace, the ADS-C application is not used for surveillance; howeverwesuggestusing RSP ratherthan RCP to remain consistent withoceanicterminology

  9. OPA Issues (Cont.) • There is no ATS function for ADS-C otherthan 4D TBO. Need to create new ATS function • Need to have a delineationbetweensmall reports and large reports • Large reports are only for a large number of waypoints in EPP • For large reports (128 waypoints), report size is unknown • Temporarily used 20 KB to estimate aircraft/ACSP/ATSU delay specification • verification required by airframe/avionics manufacturers, ACSPs, and ANSPs

More Related