Program Management Committee Meeting May 31, 2017 RTCA
Welcome & Introductions Chair Chris Hegarty, MITRE
PUBLIC MEETING ANNOUNCEMENT Read by: Designated Federal Official Lou Volchansky Program Management Committee May 31, 2017 In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, this Advisory Committee meeting is OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. Notice of the meeting was published in the Federal Register on: May 17, 2017 With the approval of the Chairman, members of public may present oral or written statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present or obtain information should coordinate with RTCA PMC Secretary Karan Hofmann and the Chairman Chris Hegarty 3
RTCA Proprietary References Policy RTCA Proprietary Reference Policy covers any patented technology and copyrighted material required to comply with a RTCA Standard. The policy allows RTCA to consider proprietary technology for inclusion in an RTCA Standard -- if it provides significant technical or economic benefit over non-proprietary technology. The policy has distinct requirements: A bona fide, public interest basis for the reference and or usage. Evidence that private pecuniary interests have not driven any decision to either include or exclude a system from the market. A participant must disclose if the use of any patented, patent pending, or copyrighted technology is proposed and/or required to comply with a RTCA Standard being developed. The Chairman of a Special Committee proposing to use Propriety information will coordinate with the committee s Program Director to provide a White Paper for approval in the Special Committee s Plenary session. When approved for inclusion in a RTCA document, the proponent must sign a Commitment to License the technology under reasonable and non-discriminatory terms. RTCA policies are available upon request.
RTCA Membership Policy
Membership Policy Approved by RTCA Policy Board May 2015: Organizations with a representative participating on RTCA Committees are required to be members of RTCA. Policy applies to all Task Groups, Work Groups, etc. Workspace access vehicle for implementation Joint Cmt. Must be member of RTCA or EUROCAE 6
Review / Approve Meeting Summary December 15, 2016 RTCA Paper No. 005-17/PMC-1570
Review / Approve Meeting Summary March 21, 2017 RTCA Paper No. 099-17/PMC-1606
Review / Approve Administrative SC TOR Revisions SC-224: RTCA Paper No. 267-16/PMC-1536 New DFO
3A 3B 6B: SC-222 Inmarsat AMS(R)S with SwiftBroadband (SBB) PMC Meeting May 31, 2017 E.F.C. LaBerge, Co-Chair RTCA Paper Nos. 18-16 PMC-1545, 030-17 PMC-1585, and 050-17 PMC-1587 10
Current TOR (Dec 2014) Revised DO-343 with performance requirements for Inmarsat SBB for SATCOM Class B (enroute continental) (June 2016) Revised DO-262 with performance requirements for Inmarsat SBB for SATCOM Class B (enroute continental) (Dec 2016) some significant editorial corrections to Iridium material in DO-262 (not listed but necessary) Revised DO-343 Material for Iridium NEXT/CERTUS (December 2017) Revised DO-262 Material for Iridium NEXT/CERTUS (December 2017) 11
Current Request for Approval DO-343A Minimum Aviation System Performance Standard For AMS(R)S Data and Voice Communications Supporting Required Communications Performance (RCP) And Required Surveillance Performance It s an A (instead of change): Inmarsat SBB for SATCOM Class B The SBB Material includes an Inmarsat SBB-to- Iridium Block 1 in enroute interference model...analogous to the LightSquared Model approved earlier Approved June 2016, contingent on development of interference model...(continued) 12
Current Request for Approval (Continued) DO-343A (continued) FRAC comments were minor, approved at October 2016 Plenary with all comments resolved Publication/formatting difficulties caused us to miss the December plenary 13
Current Request for Approval DO-262C Minimum Operational Performance Standards for Avionics Supporting Next Generation Satellite Systems (NGSS) contains the equipment standards to implement the system requirements of DO-343A It, too, it a letter revision Activity on hardware changes and test procedures led by Radek Zaruba of Honeywell (Brno) Clarification and adjustment of values in Iridium Block 1 material based on TSO testing Inmarsat & Iridium material form the basis for the interference model discussed in DO-343A Extensive review & comment resolution at October 2016 meeting (continued) 14
Current Request for Approval (continued) DO-262C, Continued Some test material dependent on Inmarsat test procedures, not published until January...thus delay until March PMC, per EUROCAE Council Additional virtual plenary in Jan 2017 to work several additional issues/comments that came up in Oct-Dec time period All comments resolved in Jan meeting 15
Recommended Action SC-222 Recommends approval DO-343A/ED-242 DO-262C/ED-243 16
Continuing/Future Work Continuing work on new Iridium material As of March WGW meeting, no technical details on Iridium NEXT were available...although the first launch of 10 NEXT satellites was successful Some concern on ability to meet December 2017 dates for Iridium NEXT MASPS/MOPS......may request delay (ToR) at June Meeting. Anticipate Iridium NEXT will be for SATCOM Class B At this time, neither SC-222 nor WG-82 has a proposed solution for SATCOM Class A, so Class A work will definitely slip; more details in June SC-222 has been working with SC-228 as part of ICC effort. Looking at L-Band AMS(R)S for UAS C2 link 17
3C and 3D: SC-228 Presentation of Detect and Avoid Minimum Operational Performance Standards Phase I RTCA Paper No. 050-17/PMC-1587 AND MOPS for Air-to-Air Radar Detect and Avoid (DAA) Systems Phase I RTCA Paper No. 051-17/PMC-1588 May 31, 2017
The Team SC 228 Co-Chairs: Paul McDuffee-Insitu Rick Heinrich-Rockwell Collins WG1 DAA Co-Chairs: Don Walker-FAA Brandon Suarez-General Atomics WG2 C2 Co-Chairs: John Moore-Rockwell Collins Steve Vantrees-FAA (DFO) Leadership Secretary: Kristina Carr-FAA Support Team: Paul Campbell-FAA, Sheila Mariano-FAA, Michelle O Leary- Regulus, Brandi Teel-RTCA, Al Secen-RTCA And 550 of our closest friends!
DAA MOPS Intended MOPS Functions Traffic Detection Track Processing Track Alerting Own ship Guidance Relative to Traffic Alerting to remain well-clear Guidance Recovery to regain DWC when it has been lost or is about to be lost and cannot be maintained due to aircraft performance. Display of Traffic TCAS II Resolution Advisory (Equipment Class 2 only)
DAA MOPS An electronic means of compliance with 14 CFR 91.111a, 91.113, and 91.181 Provide traffic information relative to the UA own ship position. Provide timely alerts to the UAS PIC when traffic is approaching near or at the DWC boundary. See Appendix C for the DWC definition. Provide timely alerts to enable UAS PICs to coordinate with ATC when possible. Provide UAS PICs suggestive guidance for remaining DWC. When optionally equipped with a collision-avoidance system, be able to coordinate maneuvers with TCAS II-equipped aircraft.
DAA MOPS System Limitations Operations of the DAA equipment complying to these MOPS specifically do not address: Any visual separation clearance or flight under Visual Flight Rules (VFR). Operations in the VFR traffic pattern of an airport. Ground taxi operations. Flight operations in other than transitioning through Class D, E or G airspace up to Flight Level (FL) 180 or to Special Use Airspace (SUA). Detection of conditions such as terrain, ground obstructions, hazardous weather and wake turbulence. All types of UAS, but only those greater than 55 lbs, capable of carrying the required equipment, and meet the aircraft performance maneuverability listed herein.
The radar will be qualified for 4 millimeters per hour (mm/hr) of rain. Operation at higher rates of rain is possible, but performance may be affected, especially at the higher frequency bands. DAA MOPS Aircraft capable of turning at 1.5 degrees/second (deg/s) (half-standard rate)operating above 60 KTAS, and aircraft capable of turning at 3.0 degrees/second (standard rate) operating above 40 KTAS. UA capable of a roll rate of at least 5 degrees/second. UA capable of a vertical rate sustainable for an altitude change of 500 for vertical DAA maneuvers. Air to Air Radar MOPS (ATAR) The DAA radar will mainly operate in the environment defined in the Operational Services and Environment Description in Appendix A of the UAS DAA MOPS, RTCA Paper No. 261-15/PMC-1400. 2. The radar will be the non-cooperative sensor for intruders below 10,000 Above Ground Level (AGL), where non-cooperative intruder aircraft fly at speeds up to 170 Knots True Airspeed (KTAS). Below 10,000 AGL, where ownship UA aircraft fly at speeds up to 200 KTAS.
DAA and Radar MOPS FRAC DAA and Radar MOPS were released for Final Review and Comment (FRAC) on 19 July 2016 to all members of SC-228 RTCA Paper No. 170-16/SC228 034 (Radar MOPS) RTCA Paper No. 261-15/PMC-1400 (DAA MOPS) FRAC comment period closed on 20 September 2016, with summary results on next chart. Process for addressing formal comments Face-to-face meeting 3-6 October 2016 to review proposed resolutions to all FRAC comments, beginning with Non-concurs, then High priority, then Medium priority comments. Lows and Editorials will be handled by section authors Proposed resolutions were coordinated with their commenters to gain their concurrence that the proposed resolutions were acceptable in addressing their concerns.
DAA FRAC Comments 2182 Total 307 Total
Formal Review and Comment Topic Area # of NC Summary of Resolution System Safety Analysis and Systems Engineering Process 8 3 Paragraph added to Introduction expressing concerns with Safety Analysis Process and reliance on FAA Safety Risk Management Panel with feedback to Phase II Collision Avoidance Interoperability 3 MOPS and Appendix M captures result of SC-228/SC-147 ISRA and is self-contained. Commenter connected to FAA TCAS Program Office for further discussion Definition of DAA Well Clear and Suggestive Guidance 8 Agreement to revisit DAA Well Clear definition per Intruder Type and Operational Environment in Phase II. Functionality in absence of GNSS 1 Agreed and Authors reviewing sections for applicability Missing Traffic Display Information 1 Agreed and updated Updates to Text previously agreed to 6 Numbers and Tables updated Latency Analysis 1 Clarified Latency Appendix and aligned relevant sections CNPC Definitions and Appendix 5 DAA and CNPC MOPS Definitions aligned. Fault Tree Analysis removed from DAA App. K Test Procedure Clarification 2 Updated to clarify DAA Radar Frequency Bands 1 Agreed to expand Appendix to cover facts of Spectrum Allocation Total (DAA) 33 6 (Radar)
PMC Action Request SC 228 hereby requests PMC approval of both the Detect and Avoid and Air to Air Radar MOPS documents as a formal recommendation to the FAA.
3E and 6C: RTCA PMC May 31, 2015 SC-230 Airborne Weather Detection Systems Ice Detection Feasibility and TOR Revision Jeff Finley, Dawn Gidner: SC-230 Chairs Paper Ref RTCA Paper Nos. 059-17/PMC-1592 and 074-17/PMC-1595
SC-230 - Topics SC-230 History and Status Modified Terms of Reference Submission of Joint RTCA/EUROCAE Feasibility Report, Weather Radar for Ice Crystal Detection Plan and Schedule
SC-230 History and Status TOR Initially Approved at December, 2013 PMC (283-13/PMC-1164) Scope: Update RTCA DO-220 Minimum Operational Performance Standards for Airborne Weather Radar with Forward-Looking Windshear Capability with FRAC resolution scheduled November, 2015. (Completed on Schedule) TOR Modification Approved at March, 2015 PMC (088-15/PMC-1325) Modified Scope: Update RTCA DO-213 Minimum Operational Performance Standards for Nose-Mounted Radomes with FRAC resolution scheduled November, 2015. (Completed on Schedule) TOR Modification Approved September, 2015 PMC (219-15/PMC-1376) Modified Scope: Support Joint RTCA/EUROCAE Report on Feasibility of Ice Crystal Detection with Airborne Weather Radar with completion scheduled November, 2016. (Completed on Schedule) DO-220A, DO-213A Publication Approved, March 2016 (018-16/PMC-1445, 019-16/PMC-1446)
Industry use of DO-220A and DO-213A has resulted in questions and requests for clarification in several areas. SC-230 membership gathered March 8, 2016 to discuss need for changes to DO-220A and DO-213A. Motion to modify terms of reference to generate Change 1 to DO-220A and DO-213A carried by SC-230 membership. Scope: SC-230 Terms Of Reference Modification Consider errata and opportunities for clarification which have been identified in DO-213A and DO-220A. Examine any reported issues and determine whether a change is warranted. If so, create Change 1 to one or both documents as required. Deliverables: DO-213A Change 1, DO-220A Change 1 June, 2018. Terminate SC-230 after delivery of DO-213A Change 1, DO-220A Change 1 in June 2018.
SC-230 Proposed Schedule 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Original SC-230 TOR DO-220 Update TOR Rev 1 (DO-213 Update) TOR Rev 2 (Ice Detect Feasibility Report) TOR Rev 3 (Change 1 DO-220/213) DO-213 Update PMC Submittal DO-220A/DO-213A Ice Detect Feasibility Study PMC Submittal Ice Detect Feasibility Report DO-220A/213A Change 1 PMC Submittal DO-220A/DO-213A Change 1 SC-230 Committee Work Complete
SC-230 Ice Crystal Detection Feasibility Report Joint Development of Feasibility Report RTCA SC-230 (Jeff Finley, Dawn Gidner co-chairs) EUROCAE WG-95 Long Range Awareness Subgroup (Camille Caruhel Chairman) Total of 4 Plenary Sessions Bi-weekly Working Group Telecons Contributors included National and international regulatory authorities (EUROCAE, RTCA) Equipment designers & manufacturers (Rockwell Collins, Honeywell, Garmin) Research organizations (NASA, GOSNIIAS), Aircraft manufacturers (Boeing, Airbus, Dassault Aviation) Airline organizations (ALPA). Result is Feasibility Study: Weather Radar for Ice Crystal Detection completed at end of 2016. 33
SC-230 Ice Crystal Detection Feasibility Report Feasibility Report Content: Defines Intended Function Defines Operational and Performance Goals Documents Radar Ability to Comply with Operational and Performance Goals Discusses Display Symbology Concepts Recommends further flight test and evaluation of flight test data, further characterization of engine susceptibility, further refinement of performance Conclusions are: Theoretical radar detection of ice crystals possible at operationally significant range provided targets are large and uniform (unlikely scenario) Flight test results reveal that target variability prevents radar-only determination of ice crystal concentration at significant range Incorporation of other information (radar manufacturer proprietary) may allow system to meet operational goals. 34
SC-230 Ice Crystal Detection Next Actions SC-230 to discuss potential next actions for radar detection of ice crystals at telecon week of March 20. Potential actions include Survey industry need for additional research and guidance in area of radar detection of ice crystals (radar manufacturers, engine manufacturers, aircraft manufacturers, regulatory authorities, airline representatives) Provide recommendation to RTCA PMC or EUROCAE to further refine feasibility report or to develop regulatory guidance (MASPS) for radar detection of ice crystals Any recommendations involving SC-230 will be communicated at the June PMC 35
SC-230 Conclusion and Recommendations Joint RTCA/EUROCAE feasibility report documenting ice crystal detection capability by weather radar is complete. Recommendation: PMC approve publication of joint feasibility study, Feasibility Study: Weather Radar for Ice Crystal Detection. Recommendation: PMC approve modified terms of reference for SC-230 to allow development of DO-220A Change 1 and DO-213A Change 1.
3F: SC-231 Presentation of: MOPS for Terrain Awareness and Warning System May 31, 2017 RTCA Paper No. 012-17/PMC-1573
Committee Membership SC-231 Leadership Co-chairs Yasuo Ishihara Honeywell Rick Ridenour ACSS/L-3 Technologies Designated Federal Official Charisse Green FAA RTCA Program Manager Hal Moses Sophie Bousquet Jennifer Iverson Rebecca Morrison Secretary Zach Reynolds - ACSS/L-3 Technologies
Committee Membership SC-231 Participants Avionics manufacturers ACSS, Garmin, Honeywell, IANS, Rockwell Collins, Thales, Universal Avionics Aircraft Manufacturers Airbus, Boeing Government FAA, MITRE, US Air Force Airlines Alaska, Delta
TAWS MOPS Pedigree DO-161A TSO-C151c AC 25-23 New Req. MOPS MOPS MOPS TOR Sec. F for GPWS for TAWS for TAWS (NTSB Rec) DO-3xx MOPS For TAWS
FRAC FRAC ended October 31, 2016 149 comments FRAC comments assessment conducted during Plenary on 7-9 November 2016. Committee gave conditional approval to the document at the November plenary pending review of Mode 1 requirement updates. Committee gave final approval to the document during virtual plenary on 8 December 2016.
Non-Concur DO-XYZ Inputs 2 Non-concur comments Received 1 Non-concur was related to a missing name in the membership roster. 1 Non-concur was related to a lower cut-off limit of the Mode 5 Glideslope caution envelope not being compatible with an aircraft OEM s requirement. Both non-concurs were resolved to the satisfaction of the commenters and the committee.
Conclusions SC-231 has reached consensus on following document: - DO-XYZ, Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) for Terrain Awareness and Warning Systems (TAWS) Airborne Equipment SC-231 recommends PMC to approve the document for release for publication. SC-231 recommends PMC to sunset SC-231.
4: ICC Report to the PMC (RTCA Paper No. 067-17/PMC-1594) May 31, 2017
ICC Tasking from the PMC At its December 15, 2016 meeting the PMC approved the ICC s recommendations on 3 of the 4 comments provided by Don Walker, AIR-130 Surveillance Lead and major contributor to a number of RTCA MOPS The outstanding comment sought resolution of Paragraph 4 of the MOPS Guidelines A working group led by Rick Heinrich was convened to provide guidance on a recommended resolution 45
Recent ICC Activity The ICC s Section 4 working group held a teleconference on January 26, 2017 to discuss proposed resolutions to Paragraph 4. At issue: Should Section 4 be recommended to continue to be part of the RTCA MOPS, or had its inclusion been resolved by other changes to previous sections? At a follow-on teleconference held on February 8, 2017, the Section 4 working group reviewed a proposed re-drafted MOPS Guide Section 4 developed by Robert Grove and Clay Barber of Garmin The ICC held a teleconference on March 2, 2017 to review the Working Group s recommendation for new text in Section 4 of the MOPS Drafting Guide 46
Original Text of Section 4 of the MOPS Drafting Guide 4 AIRCRAFT OPERATIONAL PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS When equipment is designed and manufactured to meet these MOPS, and it is properly installed in an aircraft in accordance with applicable installation and operational approval guidance and regulations, it is expected that all aircraft level functional and operational performance criteria will be met. The equipment when installed contributes to the operation and performance of the MOPS functions at the aircraft level. Other aircraft-level contributions such as redundant or additional equipment may also be required. The equipment design should consider the types and characteristics of aircraft for which installation of this equipment is intended as well as the MOPS function at an aircraft level, and the equipment should be designed such that the equipment s contribution to aircraftlevel operational and functional requirements is adequate. 47
Rationale for Changing Section 4 In practice, the intent and the intended user of the information seems to be widely misunderstood. In reviewing a subset of MOPS documents, some contain Shall-statements within this section, yet this section is rarely if ever used by the FAA within TSO or other documents. A review of several MOPs documents revealed the following: DO-229E GPS/SBAS very small section titled Operational Characteristics that primarily references the AIM, AC 20-138, AC 90-105, AC 90-107, and AC 90-96. DO-253C GPS/GBAS couple pages titled Operational Performance Requirements that includes discussion of Alert Presentation, Guidance Reference Point, and Missed Approach Guidance DO-317B ASA (aka ADS-B In traffic) does not include anything resembling MOPS drafting guide Aircraft Operational Performance Characteristics section DO-334 AHRS does not include anything resembling MOPS drafting guide Aircraft Operational Performance Characteristics section DO-346 AeroMACS couple pages titled Equipment Operational Performance Requirements that includes discussion of Power Inputs, Displays, Communication Controls, Equipment Operating Functions, System Operational Indication, and Equipment Operating Conditions as well as test procedures for each of these topics. Includes Shall statements. DO-358 FIS-B does not include anything resembling MOPS drafting guide Aircraft Operational Performance Characteristics section DO-361 FIM does not include anything resembling MOPS drafting guide Aircraft Operational Performance Characteristics section 48
Proposed MOPS Drafting Guide Section 4 AIRCRAFT OPERATIONAL PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS 4 This section contains no design requirements. The purpose of this section is to provide useful considerations regarding equipment designed to meet these MOPS when that equipment is installed and used on an aircraft to meet operational requirements. For the most part, equipment designed to meet these MOPS is expected to meet aircraft operational requirements when installed in an aircraft. However, certain requirements may be affected by specific airspace or operational requirements which should be considered by the equipment manufacturer when designing the equipment. In some cases, there may be multiple classes of equipment corresponding to different operational requirements or in some cases, operational requirements may drive a need for additional equipment. The equipment design should consider the types and characteristics of aircraft, and the airspace in which they are intended to operate, for which installation of this equipment is intended in addition to the MOPS function at an aircraft level. The equipment should be designed such that the equipment s contribution to aircraft-level operational and functional requirements is adequate. 49
ICC Recommendation That the PMC approve the ICC s proposed changes to Section 4, Aircraft Operational Characteristics (Retitled), in our MOPS Drafting Guide The ICC notes with appreciation that the PMC has requested, as recommended by the ICC in December, that our Special Committees provide any comments that those SCs might have on the SPR/Interop/MASPS and MOPS Drafting Guides by the June 2017 PMC meeting, so that, with appropriate coordination with EUROCAE for the development of joint documents, a 5-year update to these Drafting Guides might be developed in a manner to be determined by the PMC 50
5A: Set Up PMC Lite for May Karan Hofmann, PMC Secretary
5B: Support for SC-214 TOR Revision Karan Hofmann, PMC Secretary
5C: Redistribute/Relook at EUROCAE WG-106 TOR Karan Hofmann, PMC Secretary
5D: Cross Cutting Committee Activity RTCA Paper No. 133-17/PMC-1612 Clay Barber, CCC Chairman
CCC Update CCC met April 11 for GADSS familiarization Received post-meeting inputs from Ron Stroup and Ed Hahn Rick Heinrich and Jessie Turner drafted an initial position Rick attended May 9-11 International Conference: Flight Location & Data Recovery in Hamburg, Germany New perspective that a MOPS may not be needed CCC has yet to convene to discuss this latest development Regardless of final outcome, from a process perspective, CCC has benefited from these deliberations and related assessment of concept readiness, standards, global perspectives, ICAO documentation, etc. 55
5E: Implementation Procedure for new MOPS/MASPS/SPR Drafting Guides Action Closed Karan Hofmann, PMC Secretary
5F: PMC Membership Review Al Secen, PMC Member
5G: Recommendation for SC-230 Report Publication Karan Hofmann, PMC Secretary
5H: Availability of Documents as Reference for Selected EUROCAE WG s Al Secen, PMC Member
6A: SC-214 Proposed TOR Changes May 31, 2017 RTCA Paper No. 121-17/PMC-1610 Chuck Stewart Chair Dongsong Zeng Secretary Thomas Mustach - DFO
61 7A: SC-206 Sub-group 4 (SG-4) Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) for Eddy Dissipation Rate (EDR) Reporting RTCA Paper No. 079-17/PMC-1598 Scope Comparison to MOPS Drafting Guide Presentation to RTCA PMC Membership May 31, 2017 Sub-group Co-chairs Tammy Farrar FAA Bill Watts - DAL
62 Current Draft Document: Purpose This document defines the minimum requirements applicable to in situ Eddy Dissipation Rate (EDR) turbulence computational algorithms (hereafter referred to as the EDR algorithm). In situ, as used herein, refers to calculations that use aircraft-derived observations as input. The requirements of this document apply to developers of EDR algorithms. These requirements specify algorithm output characteristics that should be beneficial to manufacturers, implementers and other users of the EDR algorithm, such as flight crews, dispatchers, wake vortex models, meteorological forecasters and forecast models. Collectively these output characteristics define a set of requirements that apply to a universal set of EDR algorithms. These requirements are the means of assuring that the EDR algorithm output for a given aircraft will be comparable that of other aircraft, within a range of accepted uncertainty, for the same turbulence conditions encountered in routine aeronautical operation. Any regulatory application of this document is the sole responsibility of appropriate governmental agencies.
Our approach has been to focus on the EDR algorithm, independent of: o o Document Scope How the calculations are done, because there is no single right way ; that is, there is no Gold Standard algorithm How the EDR algorithm is implemented ( installed ) in an application, because the algorithm can be implemented in various applications Because of this, we ve defined a very narrow scope: o o Only the performance of the algorithms in the Testing Environment is in scope The real-world data inputs/outputs, software and applications are out of scope 63
64 Scope comparison to MOPS Drafting Guide Since the scope is focused on the performance of the algorithms in the Testing Environment : o We need developers to adhere to the tests as defined (including highly specified test input data) and not deviate. This conflicts with the Drafting Guide. Example: Drafting Guide Section 1.7 (& similarly wording in Sec 2.4.3) state that specific test procedures are cited, but it is recognized that other methods may be preferred. Since the real-world data inputs/outputs, software and applications are out-ofscope, there are many parts of the required verbiage in the MOPS Drafting Guide that are not applicable, especially in sections 2.1 and 2.3: o o Section 2.1.1: Airworthiness. In the design and manufacture of the equipment, the manufacturer shall provide for installation so as to no impair the airworthiness of the aircraft. This applies to the equipment on the aircraft where the algorithm resides within a software application (e.g., ACMS), not to the algorithm itself. This type of example applies to numerous parts of the Drafting Guide, such as Environmental Conditions, Equipment Performance, and others.
MOPS Drafting Guide Issues Testing each/every EDR implementation in installed application is not feasible: o o Each aircraft type with each different application could be required to be tested. Massive effort! Some of the information needed to test the algorithm on each airframe type is proprietary to the manufacturers. If the intent of the Drafting Guide is to make documents standardized and more navigable with standard section/sub-section titles, then we find that we would be changing section/sub-section titles or stating they are nonapplicable to be more in line with our scope. 65 o o We believe that doing this will result in confusion to any developer wanting to use the document. Two of the three major EDR algorithm developers are on the SG writing the documents, and they are both adamant about this point. In addition, the SG includes airline industry representatives who agree, as well.
66 TORs Product: Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) for Eddy Dissipation Rate (EDR) SC-206 Sub-group 4 is going to recommend a change of the document type from a MOPS to a Guidelines Document Product: Guidelines for In Situ Eddy Dissipation Rate (EDR) Algorithm Performance Scope: Define requirements as necessary for input parameters and computational methodologies to facilitate the calculation of EDR by various algorithms such that the outputs are operationally comparable. (No Change) Envision Use of Deliverable: The EDR Guidelines Document will be used to standardize the output of various EDR algorithms to provide accurate and operationally comparable results.
67 Questions
SC-159: Next Meeting Documents Revision to DO-253C Minimum Operational Performance Standards for GPS Local Area Augmentation System Airborne Equipment Revision to DO-246D GNSS-Based Precision Approach Local Area Augmentation System (LAAS) Signal-in-Space Interface Control Document (ICD) SC-206: New Document Guidance for the Usage of Data Linked Forecast and Current Wind Information in Air Traffic Management (ATM) Operations 68
Next Meeting Documents Originally Scheduled But Not Able SC-225: Revision to DO-311 Minimum Operational Performance Standards for Rechargeable Lithium Battery Systems SC-235: Revision to DO-227 Minimum Operational Performance Standards for Lithium Batteries 69
Next Meetings PMC: Thursday, June 22, 2017 Tuesday, September 21, 2017 Wednesday, December 13, 2017 Thursday, March 22, 2018 70
May Action Item Review 71
ADJOURN 73