CM CNS RM 1 - 0

Civil-Military CNS/ATM
Interoperability Roadmap
Edition 1.0
milt
Cover picture
is courtesy of
Royal
Norvegian Air
Force
Civil-Military CNS/ATM Interoperability Roadmap

iii
DOCUMENT CHARACTERISTICS
TITLE
Document Identifier EDITION: 1.0

EDITION DATE: 03 Jan 2006
Abstract
This document details the migration path towards convergence/interoperability of civil and military CNS infrastructures in
support of ATM functions, as required in order to reduce mixed-mode operations, safely co-exist in the same airspace
applying similar operational concepts and maximise seamless information exchanges between civil and military units.
The Roadmap addresses the elements of the infrastructure where there is an interface of capabilities between civil and mil-
itary aircraft or ground supporting systems and seeks to foster the interoperability measures required when new systems
are to be deployed.
Keywords
Civil-military Interoperability CNS
Contact Person(s): Tel: UNIT:

LtCol Jorge PEREIRA +32 2 729 5036 DG/MIL
Maj Sasho NESHEVSKI +32 2 729 3962 DG/MIL
STATUS, AUDIENCE AND ACCESSIBILITY

Status Intended for Accessible via
Working Draft ❏ General Public ❏ Intranet ❏

Draft ❏ EATMP ✓
❏ Extranet ✓
❏
Stakeholders
Proposed Issue ❏ Restricted Audience ❏ Internet (www.eurocontrol.int) ✓
❏
Released Issue ✓
❏ Printed & electronic copies of the document can be obtained from
the EATMP Infocentre (see page iii)
ELECTRONIC SOURCE
Path: P:
Host System Software Size
Windows_NT Microsoft Word 2002 851 Kb

iv
EATMP Infocentre
EUROCONTROL Headquarters
96 Rue de la Fusée
B-1130 BRUSSELS
Tel: +32 (0)2 729 51 51

Fax: +32 (0)2 729 99 84
E-mail: eatmp.infocentre@eurocontrol.int
Open on 08:00 - 15:00 UTC from Monday to Thursday, including
DOCUMENT APPROVAL
The following table identifies all management authorities who have successively approved the present issue of this document.
AUTHORITY NAME AND SIGNATURE DATE
Chairman CNS FGr Lieutenant Colonel Jorge A. Pereira
Chairman MIL Team Colonel (ret’d) Luc Vervoort

v
CONTENTS
DOCUMENT CHARACTERISTICS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii
DOCUMENT APPROVAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2 About this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.3 Responsible body . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2 Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3 Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4 Overall CNS issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2 ATM Security issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.3 Rationalisation of CNS infrastructures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.4 Applicability to Operational Air Traffic (OAT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5 Communications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
5.2 Military communications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
5.3 The EUROCONTROL Communications Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9
5.4 Civil-military communications interoperability issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10
5.4.1 Ground networks interoperability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.4.2 Air/Ground communications interoperability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.4.3 Air/Ground Voice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.4.4 Expansion of 8.33 kHz Channel Spacing and State Aircraft . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.4.5 Air/Ground Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.4.6 Long-term communications technology convergence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.5 Recommended actions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
6 Navigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
6.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
6.2 Military requirements for aeronautical radio navigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
6.3 The ECAC Navigation Strategy and Implementation Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
6.4 Civil-military navigation interoperability issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
6.4.2 The Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
6.4.3 Ground-based NAVAIDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
6.4.4 Required Navigation Performance (RNP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
6.4.5 Area navigation (RNAV) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
6.4.6 The required standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
6.4.7 Long-term navigation technology convergence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
6.5 Recommended actions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

vi
CONTENTS
7 Surveillance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
7.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
7.2 Military surveillance requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
7.3 The EUROCONTROL Surveillance Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
7.3.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
7.3.2 The Surveillance Strategy from today to 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
7.3.3 The Surveillance Strategy from 2010 to 2015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
7.3.4 The Surveillance Strategy from 2015 to 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
7.4 Civil-military surveillance interoperability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
7.4.2 Mode S and its interoperability with State aircraft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
7.4.3 Long-term surveillance technology convergence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
7.5 Recommended actions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29
8 Certification issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32

8.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32
8.2 European civil and military certification issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32
8.3 A harmonised approach to the certification of military aircraft . . . . . . . . . .32
9 Spectrum issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33

9.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33
9.2 Working arrangements in the spectrum domain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33
9.3 Aeronautical spectrum constraints and opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34
10 Other Aeronautical Systems Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36

10.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36
10.2 Future flight management systems (FMSs) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36
11 GLOSSARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37
11.1 Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37
11.2 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41
12 Referenced and related documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45

ANNEX A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46
ANNEX B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48

1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Executive Summary has been developed as a separate stand-alone document.

2
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 General
1.1.1 This document describes the fundamental aspects of interoperability between civil and military Communications,
Navigation and Surveillance (CNS) systems, which must be considered for the development of a Civil-Military
CNS/ATM Interoperability Roadmap.The proposed Interoperability Roadmap should be based on systems and pro-
cedures the substance of which is recognised by the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) and appropri-
ate military standards.
1.1.2 The EUROCONTROL ATM Strategy for the years 2000+ [Ref.: 01] stresses the importance of civil-military inter-
operability, which is the enabler of future capacity gains associated with the possible delegation of separation tasks.
This interoperability will depend on the provision of accurate real-time data on aircraft position and intent or sta-
tus, and improvements in flight data processing systems and CNS systems, in particular mobile data communications,
increased surveillance efficiency, and navigation system performance.These improvements and quality requirements
call for new forms of interoperability.
1.1.3 The application of more dynamic use of airspace has led to a mixed environment in which all airspace users share
the same airspace. In this mixed environment it is of outmost importance that civil and military aviation cooperate
and coordinate through appropriate interoperable systems.
1.1.4 The Roadmap addresses the main technical enablers required to ensure information flows between civil and mili-
tary units/systems, as required for the support of both civil and military ATM operations and other military compo-
nents of air operations (including air defence/air policing).
1.1.5 The Civil-Military CNS/ATM Interoperability Roadmap is intended to contribute to improve the effectiveness of
existing and new mechanisms, criteria and structures for enhancing civil-military cooperation and coordination.
Ultimately it will promote airspace availability and access for military aircraft when and where needed, and the avail-
ability of sufficient spectrum allocation for the CNS/ATM systems used.
1.1.6 With the rationalisation of European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC) and EUROCONTROL CNS strategies and
the application of common technologies, the convergence between military and civil standards will be targeted.
Those common technologies should lead to improvements in the applicability of common rules and required per-
formances (airworthiness) for both civil and military flight operations within ECAC airspace.
This interoperability Roadmap should also be considered as a reference document promoting solutions for the
development of integrated systems.
1.2 About this document

1.2.1 This document defines and describes the Civil-Military CNS/ATM Interoperability Roadmap for ECAC airspace (see
the map of ECAC States in Figure 1). It describes the future evolution of the CNS/ATM environment as a compo-
nent of the European Air Traffic Management System.

3
INTRODUCTION
Iceland
Finland
Norway
Sweden
Estonia
Latvia
Ireland Denmark
Lithuania
United
Kingdom
Netherlands
Poland
Belgium Germany
Luxembourg Czech Ukraine

Republic
Slovakia
France Austria
Switzerland Moldova
Hungary
Slovenia Romania
Croatia
Monaco Bosnia and
Georgia Azerbaijan
Herzegovina
Serbia and
Portugal
Italy Montenegro Armenia
Spain Bulgaria
FYROM1
Albania
Turkey
Greece
Malta
Cyprus 1 The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
Figure 1: ECAC Member States
1.2.2 This Roadmap identifies general principles and future recommended actions for providing a harmonised framework
for civil-military CNS/ATM systems planning for ECAC airspace. It considers available and potential communications,
surveillance and navigation applications and means of supporting these applications in terms of the performance,
functionalities, and enabling infrastructure required.
1.2.3 The Roadmap is a living document which will be reviewed periodically in order to ensure that the rationale for the
next step forward remains valid in the light of the progress made, and to reflect the changes which actually take place
in aviation. It is anticipated that the milestones defined in this document will be included as appropriate in the rele-
vant EUROCONTROL and national documents.The approach taken in structuring this document is to describe first
the known military requirements or situation and then the current EUROCONTROL/ECAC CNS strategies, and
lastly to draw the appropriate conclusions in terms of civil-military interactions.
1.2.4 This document deals with two different subjects that are closely related.The first is the need for technical civil-military CNS
interoperability for CNS infrastructure, such as interoperability of airborne avionics equipage, and the second is functional
interoperability in the area of ATM services such as radar data sharing or ground communications services.
1.3 Responsible body

1.3.1 This document was produced by the EUROCONTROL Civil-Military CNS/ATM Systems Interoperability Roadmap
Focus Group (CNS FG), an expert group established by and reporting to the Military Team (MILT).The ownership
of the document and the responsibility for its maintenance and future updates rests with the EUROCONTROL
MILT.

4
2 OBJECTIVES
2.1 The objective of this Roadmap is to provide a harmonised and integrated common framework that will allow the
evolution of European civil-military CNS/ATM systems.This framework will support the operational improvements
outlined in the EUROCONTROL ATM Strategy for the years 2000+ and will be applicable from now until after
2020. Furthermore, the Roadmap will:
➭ be a significant element of the harmonisation efforts being promoted within the framework of relevant ATM
projects;
➭ identify, in the shorter term, a minimum set of civil-military CNS/ATM interoperability requirements and the
progressive convergence of related CNS techniques and capabilities;
➭ take into account the fact that the ultimate interoperability objective for navigation is the promotion of total
RNP capability (values);
➭ have to stay aligned with future ICAO developments in the area of required communications performance
(RCP) and required surveillance performance (RSP);
➭ ensure that interoperability is the transitional means for achieving a common operational environment, whilst
the full integration of CNS systems supporting ATM functions is aiming towards final common systems conver-
gence.
2.2 These objectives make fundamentally clear that all military equipage plans in terms of ATM capabilities will be impact-
ed although it has to be recognised that not all military aircraft will require advanced CNS fits.

5
3 SCOPE
3.1 This document delivers a set of principles necessary to provide a harmonised and integrated common strategic
framework for Civil-Military CNS/ATM Interoperability Roadmap planning for the entire ECAC airspace. It also:
➭ describes present and future CNS/ATM applications and the means of supporting these applications in terms
of required performance, equipment functionality and enabling infrastructure;
➭ focuses on maintaining or improving the current level of flight safety;
➭ addresses the improvement of flexibility, mission effectiveness and global interoperability;
➭ covers technical, operational and regulatory aspects associated with CNS/ATM systems where civil-military
interoperability is required;
➭ indicates the way forward to achieving improved convergence of civil and military CNS technologies and asso-
ciated spectrum support;
➭ details the migration path towards interoperability/convergence of civil and military CNS/ATM infrastructures,
in order to use the same airspace safely and achieve seamless information exchanges.
3.2 The time horizon of this document is divided into three phases: the short term (2006-2010); the medium term
(2010-2015); and the long term (2015-2020 and beyond).This is in line with other ECAC/EUROCONTROL strate-
gies and documents.
3.3 In order to cross-check various implementation plans, the EUROCONTROL European Convergence and
Implementation Plan (ECIP) objectives applicable to the CNS Domains are attached as Annex B.

6
4 OVERALL CNS ISSUES

4.1 General
4.1.1 CNS developments are driven not only by ATM needs but also by other requirements including safety and security.
In the case of military ATM and air defence, CNS systems must also meet very stringent military operational require-
ments. These requirements have an impact on the design and development of CNS components, their test meth-
ods, validation and certification procedures.
4.1.2 The role of the Communications, Navigation and Surveillance infrastructure is to support and enable the practical
operation of ATM. Past experience has revealed deficiencies in the harmonisation and interoperability of civil-mili-
tary CNS systems. CNS/ATM systems, including avionics, need as far as possible to be globally interoperable for both
civil and military aviation. Great efforts have been made within the EUROCONTROL Domains and Programmes, as
well as at ICAO and industry levels, to improve CNS infrastructure.
4.1.3 Recently, airspace users, service providers and regulatory authorities (civil and military), have requested a clear
CNS/ATM Interoperability Roadmap in which military aviation requirements should be taken on board. In accor-
dance with a EUROCONTROL MILT decision, CNS FG is developing such a Civil-Military CNS/ATM Interoperability
Roadmap.
4.1.4 Interoperability, interfacing and integration will be the key components of the Roadmap. Enhancing or at least main-
taining safety levels in aviation is an essential and critical element when improving efficiency and civil-military inter-
operability.This is and will remain the main driver throughout the development of the next generation of CNS/ATM
technology.
4.1.5 New systems and concepts emerging as technology advances offer potential improvements in terms of flight safety,
efficiency and/or economy. Emerging technologies can support a variety of systems designs and implementation
options, some of them still immature.
4.1.6 Existing CNS/ATM systems suffer from shortcomings associated with technical, operational, economic and interop-
erability aspects. Despite the improvements achieved through harmonisation phases and the measures already in
hand to provide further improvements, current systems are unlikely to be able to cope with predicted civilian traf-
fic increases. Emerging technologies will be able to support a variety of systems designs and implementation options.
These technologies will mature into new systems and concepts which will offer potential improvements in terms of
flight safety, efficiency and/or economy.
4.1.7 This Civil-Military CNS/ATM Interoperability Roadmap must be in line with expressed operational improvements,
taking a gate-to-gate approach and recognising the large variety of aircraft with different capabilities seeking to oper-
ate with optimum performance by exploiting the benefits of new and/or rationalised existing systems as early as
possible.
4.2 ATM Security issues

4.2.1 The growing threat to the aviation industry from terrorist acts means that the security of passengers, aircraft and
even ATM facilities is assuming greater importance.
4.2.2 Security threats (intentional acts affecting aircraft or people) may be directed at aircraft or through them to targets
on the ground. ATM facilities and systems may also become threat targets.
4.2.3 The ATM system should take the necessary protective measures in order to minimise the effectiveness of acts against
ATM facilities, systems and data and the undue dissemination of data. It will also need to ensure the security of air
traffic information and data systems from outside interference.
4.2.4 In close consultation with, among others, Member States, ICAO, ECAC and the European Commission, EURO-
CONTROL has identified four strategic initiatives, namely:

7
OVERALL CNS ISSUES

➭ establish processes to optimise the sharing of civil air traffic control (ATC) and military (ATC/air defence) sur-
veillance information;
➭ create a European regional focal point for air traffic management information, involving civil and military interests;
➭ give priority to the validation of a high-capacity air-ground communications capability for the transmission of
encrypted cockpit voice, flight data and on-board video information;
➭ ensure that both civil and military ATC procedures and training relating to hijack and other emergency situa-
tions are reviewed and harmonised.
4.2.5 Particular attention will need to be paid to the preparation of contingency plans designed to handle degradations of
the ATM system and security-related emergency situations. Specific additional measures include the maintenance of
efficient communications between the aircraft and the ground, the provision of information on the traffic situation
to the authorities in charge of security and the development of suitable contingency plans.
4.3 Rationalisation of CNS infrastructures

4.3.1 An important aspect that needs to be emphasised is the fact that, in parallel with civil CNS assets, it is essential that
existing military CNS infrastructures should also be considered as a valid contributor to civil-military interoperabili-
ty whenever security and institutional constraints permit.
4.3.2 The present Roadmap should therefore promote synergies between civil and military organisations, leading to an
improved rationalisation of national CNS resources. Examples of military CNS systems which should be seen as hav-
ing the potential to serve these purposes are UHF and HF radio communications, primary surveillance radar (PSR)
systems, SSR and IFF systems, multilateration/passive systems, GPS/military SATCOM, military TACANs/VORTACs,
military tactical data links, etc.
4.3.3 The widespread migration of civil and military ground networks supporting ATM information exchanges to distrib-
uted systems based on TCP/IP technology offers enormous opportunities for the rapid rise in levels of interoper-
ability between civil and military CNS components.These modern technologies bring the potential to benefit from
a bearer support independent of waveforms, data formats and higher protocol layers. Undoubtedly, another poten-
tial benefit of using common networking standards is that CNS systems will be more highly integrated and the diver-
gences between them less and less visible.
4.3.4 The replacement of the X.25 based data networking, which is reaching obsolescence, represents a unique opportu-
nity to put in place high capacity, common and seamless IP networks flowing through civil and military units capable
of supporting a wide range of ATM services. If part of a well-coordinated architecture, this would also enable the
rationalisation of existing civil and military CNS infrastructures, avoiding overlapping assets with mutual benefits.
4.4 Applicability to Operational Air Traffic (OAT)

4.4.1 The Roadmap does not initially specify which CNS capabilities and resources are to be used by State aircraft oper-
ating as OAT and their associated supporting infrastructure. OAT should be left outside the scope of this document.
4.4.2 However, once regulations and procedures for OAT within Europe are completed, a minimum set of civil-military
CNS interoperability aspects could be extracted from the Roadmap. Later editions of the Roadmap will, as appro-
priate, address OAT CNS requirements.
4.4.3 In the medium and longer term it is not foreseen that OAT procedures and rules will be dramatically different from
those applicable for GAT, hence quite consistent with the proposals made in this CNS/ATM Interoperability
Roadmap. Therefore, the supporting infrastructure foreseen for military units and State aircraft operating as GAT
could also be used to a larger extent to enable OAT operations as well.

8
5 COMMUNICATIONS
5.1 Introduction
5.1.1 The communications infrastructure used for civil-military ATM purposes varies from State to State but normally com-
prises, on the ground, switched or direct lines for inter-centre voice and flight data (OLDI) coordination as well as
connections for radar data exchanges. Air navigation service providers (ANSPs) normally make available AFTN ter-
minals which are used to exchange flight plans, NOTAMS, meteorological data and other aeronautical information.
On the airborne side, only military aircraft equipped with VHF radios with channel spacing of 8.33 kHz are interop-
erable with the infrastructure put in place by civil ANSPs and UHF1 when provided by those ANSPs.
5.1.2 Communications bearers used to support ATC functions still rely on ageing techniques such as the X.25 Protocol
for ground connections and analogue VHF voice for air/ground communications.This situation is expected to evolve
in the future towards the use in aviation of state-of-the-art communications technologies. This includes the wide-
spread deployment of distributed ground networks based on the IP protocols and a new air/ground communica-
tions architecture offering broadband digital services capable of handling high-quality voice and data applications.
5.1.3 The level of interoperability between civil and military CNS/ATM systems remains entirely insufficient and based only
on limited local requirements. This is true not only for fixed ground communications but also for military avionics,
which are normally oriented more towards warfare capabilities than ATM.
5.2 Military communications

5.2.1 Military communications and information systems (CIS) are mainly enablers for the exercise of command-and-con-
trol (C2) functions.The main purpose of CIS resources is therefore to allow the information processing and trans-
fer required to support military decision-making, transmit commanders' orders to the forces assigned and receive
reports on the execution of tasks.
5.2.2 CIS connectivity must reach across the whole area of interest of the military alliance or organisations, regardless of
where forces are deployed, and must also interlink appropriate headquarters and the integrated military structure.
The key feature of today's military communications is its "joint" nature, as required, for example to support forces
operating out of area.
5.2.3 The military CIS infrastructure, including the communications segment, is used for a large variety of tactical informa-
tion exchanges associated with all aspects of air operations, e.g. data from radar and other sensors, flight data, mete-
orology, tasking information, logistics data and administrative messaging. A relevant aspect is its usage for the trans-
mission and fusion of data collected by remote sensors for the compilation of the Air Picture, which is essential to
the exercise of C2.
5.2.4 Military communications, which include the technical means used to support the above-mentioned C2 tasks, nor-
mally comprise the following:
➭ high-capacity fixed-backbone secure networks ideally characterised by an open and distributed architecture in
the form of local and wide-area networks (LANs/WANs) supporting voice, data and multimedia formats and
connected to mobile systems via appropriate interfaces;
➭ mobile communications, normally using radio sites and satellite communications, to interconnect air operations
centres, controlling units, mobile platforms and deployable forces;
➭ tactical data links, e.g. Link 11 or JTIDS/MIDS Link 16, in order to extend sensor coverage and exchange data;
➭ administrative communications using multiple bearers.
5.2.5 For the purposes of this Roadmap, it is worth noting the limited applicability of such infrastructure to the support
of ATM functions. These functions can thus hardly be considered the primary focus of military communications
requirements.This does not mean, however, that military communications are totally irrelevant to ATM.
1 NATO clearly recognise the importance of UHF provision as the main support of air/ground voice communications for military OAT operations and as a
contingency means to handle Stare aircraft not equipped with a VHF 8.33 kHz radio when operating within GAT environment.

9
COMMUNICATIONS
5.2.6 In many cases, there are local implementations for the regular sharing of radar data as required for coverage aug-
mentation. In order to contribute as an important input to the required air picture as well as to the support of
other military activities. Other resources in support of civil-military coordination for ATC and air defence purposes
are also normally in place, namely for the exchange of ATM data, but the processes used vary from State to State.
5.3 The EUROCONTROL Communications Strategy

5.3.1 The EUROCONTROL EATMP Communications Strategy [Ref.: 03] presents the communication services which
must be provided in the short, medium and long term to support the requirements of ATM, and describes the avail-
able and potential infrastructures by means of which such communication services can be provided.
5.3.2 Many operational improvements for ATM will be enabled by a number of communications techniques, including
extensive interconnection of computer networks, VHF radio with 8.33 kHz spacing for voice communications and
wide deployment of data link communications.The Strategy points towards the implementation of gate-to-gate con-
cepts via the closer integration of air and ground systems and the use of "state-of-the-art" technologies. It still envis-
ages the need to support national security and defence requirements through the integration or interoperability of
civil and military systems.
5.3.3 Ground/ground communications services are to interconnect ATC centres, airports, regional units, airlines and exter-
nal services such as air defence and meteorology services. The supporting means will be the underlying network
services of a seamless European-wide network: Pan-European Network Services (PENS).
5.3.4 The deployment of PENS, targeted to start by around 2009, is in fact the main element in the Communications
Strategy in terms of ATM ground networking. PENS has been conceived as the strategic fixed ground telecommu-
nications infrastructure for voice and data transmission and switching for the aeronautical community. PENS will be
based on existing EUROCONTROL technical specifications for the use of Internet Protocol for aeronautical
exchange of voice and data, and will replace legacy protocols such as X.25.This project will probably cope with the
regulatory aspects that are expected to emerge from a foreseeable Single European Sky Implementing Rule on inter-
operability of ground-ground communications.
5.3.5 The Aeronautical Message Handling System (AMHS) is already being implemented in some particular locations but
its wide deployment by civil ANSPs is likely to occur during 2008 in order to replace segments of the current
Aeronautical Fixed Telecommunications Network (AFTN) and the Common ICAO Data Interchange Network
(CIDIN). From 2009 onwards, when PENS is in place, AMHS will likely migrate to this underlying network support.
5.3.6 In the area of air/ground voice VHF communications between pilots and controllers, the main strategic goals are, in
the 118 MHz to 137 MHz band, to take measures to alleviate VHF congestion and reduce the voice communication
workload for the cockpit and controller. In order to pursue that objective, EUROCONTROL is continuously pro-
moting the introduction of reduced channel spacing, from 25 kHz to 8.33 kHz, to achieve the frequency benefits nec-
essary to relieve VHF congestion.
5.3.7 The strategy also foresees the wide deployment of air/ground data link communications as the main enabler for the
introduction of ATM improvements by intensifying the information exchanges between the cockpit and ground ATC.
It is forecast that routine voice communications will start to diminish as a result of the widespread introduction of
data links for non-time-critical applications. This will alleviate controller workload and improve safety and efficiency
because of the associated reduction of communication errors. Nevertheless, data links will not totally replace voice
exchanges, which will remain the primary means of critical communications for the foreseeable future.
5.3.8 An important element of the Communications Strategy with regard to the deployment of mobile network services
is the need for a technology decision, to be taken around 2006, on the choice of a future communications infrastruc-
ture which will support voice and data in the longer term. Later in this document, the mechanisms currently in place
with a view to making progress in the area of future communications infrastructure will be described.

10
COMMUNICATIONS
5.4 Civil-military communications interoperability issues
5.4.1 Ground networks interoperability
5.4.1.1 Although military ground communications are quickly evolving towards the use of distributed LANs/WANs along-
side commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) technologies, including IP protocols, the direct interconnection of civil and
military computer networks will not be immediate, although some local connections via gateways already exist.
Factors that hinder such kind of links are not only institutional aspects but also of the security requirements for the
processing and transmission of classified or sensitive military information, and technical aspects such as addressing
scheme incompatibilities.
5.4.1.2 PENS, the European-wide ATM network based on IP technology, will be deployed from 2009 mainly as an initiative
of civil ANSPs. Military units involved with ATM and AD functions should be able to access the services available
through this network in order to guarantee the data exchanges critical for civil-military coordination purposes.The
military authorities should therefore cooperate with ANSPs to seek the conditions necessary to ensure the contin-
ued provision of this service. EUROCONTROL should act as facilitator in this process and shall make available any
technical work developed in the area of interfacing with legacy systems.
5.4.1.3 In the area of aeronautical messaging, both the NATO Military Message Handling System (MMHS) and the ICAO
AMHS are based on the ISO X.400 standard. Also in this area, security aspects will probably severely constrain any
direct interconnection of systems.
5.4.1.4 AMHS will replace AFTN and CIDIN networks with effect from early 2009 approximately, but will not migrate to
operation over PENS until later. Since many military units today rely on AFTN terminals to transfer aeronautical data
such as flight plans, NOTAMS, meteorological data, etc., military access to AMHS will remain a civil-military interop-
erability requirement, probably through local agreements with civil ANSPs.
5.4.1.5 Voice-over-IP is likely to be the long-term solution for inter-centre voice services and its use could be the long-term
solution for voice communication links between civil and military units.
5.4.2 Air/Ground communications interoperability
5.4.2.1 A mismatch between the military air/ground communications infrastructure and the capabilities required for ATM is
also the norm. Military ground VHF and UHF radio sites adjacent to C2 sensors, HF stations, satellite communica-
tions and airborne UHF and VHF transceivers are mainly devoted to supporting C2 functions associated with mili-
tary operations rather than dedicated to ATC purposes.
5.4.2.2 The same consideration is valid for data link airborne equipment (e.g. Link 11, JTIDS/MIDS Link 16), which is nor-
mally used to complement the coverage of ground sensors and to provide the crew with important Command and
Control information.
5.4.3 Air/Ground Voice
5.4.3.1 The carriage of 8.33 kHz-capable radios is presently mandatory above FL245 within the airspace of 30 ECAC States.
This airspace will be vertically expanded from 15 March 2007, when mandatory carriage will be enforced above
FL195 [Ref.: 11]. Further 8.33 kHz expansion into lower airspace is likely to occur at a later date in order to increase
spectrum benefits.
5.4.3.2 Moreover, the ICAO EANPG/44 meeting decided that, unless a new technology or other suitable solutions meeting
the demand for VHF capacity were identified and agreed by 2009, 8.33 kHz channelling might need to be introduced
for all VHF voice communications requirements in Europe by about 2016.
5.4.4 Expansion of 8.33 kHz Channel Spacing and State Aircraft
5.4.4.1 Today, State aircraft which are non-8.33 kHz capable are allowed to operate as GAT within 8.33 kHz airspace, above
FL245, providing they are UHF equipped and flying in that airspace on an occasional basis [Ref.: 10]. However, in

11
COMMUNICATIONS
some States, the UHF coverage provided by civil ANSPs is limited or not available and non-8.33 State aircraft are
handled on remaining VHF 25 kHz assignments.
5.4.4.2 With the expansion of 8.33 kHz airspace for above FL195 from 15 March 2007, factors like limited UHF coverage,
non-enforceability of the 30 hour rule, that distinguish occasional from frequent GAT flyers, and the misinterpreta-
tion of current exemption, have raised the need to revise the policy for the handling of non-8.33 kHz State aircraft.
5.4.4.3 EUROCONTROL is developing a “Revised 8.33 kHz Policy for State Aircraft”. Once a final version of this policy is
agreed at the level of the Civil-Military Interface Standing Committee (CMIC), and later approved at PC level, the
final text should be incorporated into this Roadmap.This policy is being discussed along the following lines:
5.4.4.3.1 The revised policy will seek to maximise the 8.33 equipage of State aircraft in the airspace of mandatory car-
riage, especially with respect to “transport type” aircraft, new procurements and planned retrofits. Non-compliance
should be based on compelling technical or military imperative reasons and only used as last resort.
5.4.4.3.2 It is foreseen that States make every effort to equip “transport type” aircraft (i.e. C130 Hercules, C160
Transall, C141 StarLifter, KC135 Stratotanker, P180 Piaggio, etc.) by 15 March 2007 with a final date for
compliance of 12 March 2009.
The remaining non-8.33 kHz equipped State aircraft will be handled within the capacity limits of the ATM
system, taking into account the need to maintain the safety levels.
5.4.4.3.3 The flights of non-8.33 kHz equipped State aircraft will be accommodated, provided that they can be safely
handled within the capacity limits of the ATM system on UHF or 25 kHz VHF assignments.
5.4.4.4 It is unlikely that technical alternative to VHF DSB AM for air/ground voice is implemented in time to avoid a seri-
ous shortage of VHF frequencies. Moreover, the expansion of 8.33 kHz airspace will probably be extended below
FL195, affecting a number of airfields and en-route ATC services, especially at major civil airports. Hence, it seems
appropriate to consider the VHF 8.33 kHz channel spacing standard as the basis for civil-military interoperability in
the area of air/ground voice communications for State aircraft operating as GAT with due regard for the need to
keep an acceptable level of UHF provision.
5.4.4.5 The UHF infrastructure should be maintained or enhanced where feasible by civil ANSPs since it will be required in
order to handle the remaining exempted State aircraft. Continuous assessments should be conducted of the UHF
coverage provided by civil ANSPs in order to guarantee effective support for non-8.33 kHz State aircraft operations.
Possible synergies with military UHF infrastructure should be considered if augmentation is required when further
vertical expansion of 8.33 kHz airspace takes place and if institutional and security constraints so allow.
5.4.5 Air/Ground Data
5.4.5.1 The EUROCONTROL Link 2000+ Programme is fostering the introduction of data link for Controller-Pilot Data
Link Communications (CPDLC) for non time-critical communications replacing some voice exchanges.This will sup-
port an increased level of automation in routine tasks (e.g. ATC clearances) in the European theatre [Ref.: 12].
5.4.5.2 ATN VHF Data Link Mode 2 (VDL2) is the technology supporting the advent of CPDLC capabilities. It has already
been implemented at some European civil ATC centres and the equipage rates of civil airlines are steadily growing.
5.4.5.3 A Link 2000+ Mandate Rule is foreseen when equipage reaches 75% of civil flights and all civil ATC centres are
equipped. It is planned that carriage of ATN/VDL2 will be mandatory for civil aircraft from 2009 onwards for for-
ward fits and from 2014 for retrofits.
5.4.5.4 State aircraft will be exempted from this Mandate and will be handled with VHF radio voice when operating as GAT
within the airspace designated for Link 2000+ operations. Hence, freedom of access to the airspace and required
use of the ATM network is guaranteed to enable military operations and exercises.
5.4.5.5 After CPDLC baseline services, additional data link capabilities integrated with other avionics will enable implementation
of advanced ATM concepts, including ADS-B and A/G Cooperative ATS applications such as Enhanced Surveillance, Air

12
COMMUNICATIONS
Traffic Situational Awareness (ATSAW).The introduction of these additional data link services will take place within the
framework of EUROCONTROL Surveillance, ATS and Airport domains and within the remits of an implementation pro-
gramme called CASCADE (Co-operative ATS through Surveillance & Communication Applications Deployed in ECAC).
5.4.5.6 The average daily number of military GAT flights is negligible in comparison with the number of civil GAT flights and is
thus far from causing a major increase in controller workload when ATC controllers have to handle military traffic via
voice communications. In fact, it might seem appropriate to conclude at first sight that the lack of data link capability would
never preclude the military from operating as GAT, even if some ATFCM or ATC delays were experienced.
5.4.5.7 Although guaranteeing the continuous handling of State aircraft with voice a potential benefit for some State aircraft
frequently operating as GAT could be achieved if military authorities would decide to implement CPDLC capabili-
ty. This could then be seen as a supplementary communications service offered to a community of transport type
military aircraft aiming at alleviating the voice workload in the cockpit and in the ground ATC.
5.4.5.8 The Roadmap should justify any CPDLC implementation in military airframes with the need for automated ATC sup-
port with the same level of service offered to general traffic and with the need for provisions/room for future growth
in the area of (civil) data link capabilities. This could be done through a voluntary and phased introduction of early
CPDLC capability to a restricted community of large "transport-type" military aircraft frequently operating as GAT.
5.4.5.9 The timeframe for such implementation of CPDLC data link services on board military aircraft could, broadly speak-
ing, follow the large-scale introduction of CPDLC by civil ANSPs and airlines when the Link 2000+ Mandate enters
into force.Wide operational use of CPDLC services in large State aircraft could therefore start by 2009 for forward
fits and 2014 for retrofits, but some individual fleets could start introducing this capability earlier.
5.4.5.10 Follow-on data link services implemented at a later stage, around 2012, as part of CASCADE activities to comple-
ment CPDLC applications (e.g. ADS-B data link to transmit aircraft-derived data for ATC purposes) might have to
be discussed in a similar way and for the same group of large State aircraft.
5.4.5.11 The technical option for the introduction of data link capabilities for military aircraft could therefore be the imple-
mentation of the ICAO compliant ATN/VDL2, initially for CPDLC only or any other interoperable technology. As a
result of the large number of commercial aircraft, and few military (e.g. US GATM), equipped with FANS 1/A ACARS,
the EUROCONTROL Link 2000+ Programme has decided to accommodate this capability for the initial period. At
a later stage it is foreseeable that an additional data link will be required for subsequent CASCADE applications.
5.4.5.12 Alternative means of attaining ATM data link capability, such as the possible ATM use of military data links, remain
highly improbable. For example, the possible use of MIDS/Link 16 for ADS-B purposes was not progressed due to
inevitable spectrum and institutional constraints. Therefore, civil-military interoperability opportunities should con-
centrate more on the possible military use of civil data links being deployed for CPDLC and surveillance functions.
5.4.5.13 Possibilities including the interfacing of ATS systems with military data links through ground interfaces or the integration of
civil data link waveforms in a multi-mode software-defined radio could also be studied as a means of achieving the required
levels of civil-military interoperability. For this type of solution, important issues would be the interconnection of military sys-
tems with communication service provider (ARINC, SITA) ground networks and integration with cockpit avionics.This last
aspect of avionics' integration will probably arise as one of the most difficult and costly aspects to be tackled.
5.4.6 Long-term communications technology convergence
5.4.6.1 Following a recommendation of ICAO Air Navigation Conference (ANC) 11, EUROCONTROL and the FAA have
launched an action plan (AP17) [Ref.: 24] to progress the common investigation on Future Communications Infrastructure
(FCI).The scope of this initiative addresses the definition of the global Mobile Communication System, supporting air/ground
communications as from 2015 but expandable up to 2030. FCI may be composed of various technologies as required.
5.4.6.2 Within the framework of AP17, the underlying requirements and operating concepts will be defined, a technology
investigation will be performed, the feasibility of flexible airborne architecture to ease future migration will be
studied and methods to improve spectrum efficiency will be discussed.The conclusions will be included in the Future
Communications Study (FCS) report, which will be delivered by the end of 2006.

13
COMMUNICATIONS
5.4.6.3 It is expected that the conclusions on FCI will allow a technology decision that should both be incorporated into
the EUROCONTROL Communications Strategy and give impetus to efforts and plans for civil-military techno-
logical convergence.
5.4.6.4 Although a high capacity data link is the main target of this activity, this new infrastructure could integrate both voice
and data communications, enhance security protection for the information transmitted, increase flexibility in order
to add or remove services on demand and allow extensive interconnectivity capabilities. The interface with the
ground infrastructure needs also to be studied. Such features will make it possible for this new infrastructure to be
considered in military terms as a possible simultaneous enabler for both ATM and military-specific requirements.
Satellite systems, terrestrial wideband (CDMA), third-generation telephony and software-defined radios are likely to
be among the suitable candidate technologies.
5.4.6.5 Although it is well understood that military authorities still have to perform an in-depth analysis of the implications
in terms of cost, regulatory aspects, technical integration in the cockpit and connection to ground systems, this
Roadmap should envisage the partial or total adherence of military units and platforms to the new infrastructure, in
order to move from casuistic interoperability to the extensive integration of systems. Operational use of the new
system by military users could start somewhere within the timeframe 2015-2020.
5.5 Recommended actions

5.5.1 In accordance with the above discussion and conclusions concerning the various aspects associated with the progress of
civil-military interoperability and integration in the field of communications, the recommended actions are as follows:
5.5.2 Ground/ground communications
[Action C1] Develop the specification to enable a military unit or system to be a subscriber of Pan-European
Network Services (PENS), for the exchange of data and inter-centre voice over TCP/IP, including insti-
tutional, operational and technical aspects aiming at initial operational capability from 2009.
[Action C2] Encourage the measures required for military units to access a multinational AMHS service available at
civil ANSPs as required in order to replace existing AFTN/CIDIN terminals from 2009.
5.5.3 Air/ground communications
[Action C3] Plan and take actions for the recommended acceleration of forward fits and retrofits of military aircraft with
8.33 kHz-capable radios, given that VHF 8.33 kHz will be the fundamental civil-military interoperability stan-
dard for air/ground voice communications for State aircraft when operating as GAT.This should be done in
accordance with the timeframes to be laid down for the carriage of 8.33 kHz radios in the Revised 8.33
kHz Policy for State aircraft (which is not yet approved).The timeframes that are likely to be applicable are
15 March 2007, by when States should make every effort to equip “transport type” aircraft and 12 March
2009 as the final date for compliance.This is to be confirmed by approved version of the policy.
[Action C4] Ensure that UHF infrastructure is maintained or enhanced where feasible by civil ANSPs for handling
the remaining exempted non-8.33 kHz State aircraft operating as GAT above FL195.
[Action C5] Plan and where appropriate proceed with the phased introduction of early Link 2000+ CPDLC capa-
bility, with ATN/VDL2 or other interoperable technology (including FANS 1A ACARS when available),
to a restricted community of "transport-type" military aircraft which frequently operate as GAT, aiming
at operational use by 2009 for forward fits and 2014 for retrofits at the latest.
5.5.4 Long-term communications technology convergence
[Action C6] Take measures towards long-term civil-military communications technology convergence including the
synchronisation of military plans with the decision on the future communications infrastructure, to be
taken by 2006, the definition of the applicable CONOPS and the implementation and start of opera-
tional use between 2015 and 2020.

14
Table1
Communications Interoperability Roadmap
Years 2005 2010 2015 2020 Observations

Legacy X.25, etc. ■ Point-to-point dedicated links
networks implemented on the basis of local
requirements
PENS TCP/IP ■ TCP/IP widely used
Ground/Ground Communications
■ Military to subscribe to PENS services

provided by ANSPs from 2009
Inter-Centre R2, hotlines ■ Local implementations non harmonised
ATS Voice ATS/QS ■ ATS QSIG being implemented by
IG, ▼ some ANSPs; others moving to VoIP
VoIP ▲ ■ VoIP (over PENS) will be long-term
standard
AMHS AFTN CIDIN ■ Obsolete AFTN/CIDIN systems
planned to be replaced by AMHS
■ Existing at military units
AMHS ■ NATO countries use X.400/MMHS
X.400 ■ Military should replace AFTN connec
tions with AMHS capability provided
by ANSPs from 2009
A/G voice VHF 25 kHz ■ Even after widespread 8.33 kHz
comms implementation, ANSPs are keeping
some VHF 25 kHz capability
VHF 8.33 ■ Applicable to military through 8.33
kHz Policy for State aircraft
■ 8.33 kHz expansion to lower airspace
awaiting new system
Air /Ground Communications
UHF 25 kHz ■ ANSPs' capability to accommodate

non-8.33 State aircraft
A/G data link VDL ■ State aircraft exempted from Mandate
comms Mode2 ■ Transport-type State aircraft are
recommended to be equipped if flying
frequently as GAT in CPDLC airspace
1090ES, 2nd ■ ADS-B CooPATS Data Link
data link ■ Complementary to Link 2000+
■ Applicability to State aircraft to be
defined. Could be considered as aug-
mentation of CPDLC applications
Military data Link 16 MIDS ■ Possible interoperability via ground
link interface
■ Uncertain ATM use
Future Mix ■ Enabler for civil-military technology
comm. of technologies convergence
New Comm.
system to be screened ■ Decision taken by 2006 at the latest

■ Application independent incorporating
voice and data
■ Possible candidates are satellite,
wideband/CDMA, 3G telephony,
TDMA, etc.
Key Legacy Required for C-M interoperability Recommended Existing military systems

15
6 NAVIGATION
6.1 Introduction
6.1.1 The need for transparent interoperability between civil and military navigation is of the utmost importance when
flights are conducted in controlled airspace. Besides today's requirements (e.g. RVSM and B-RNAV), there are
planned future navigation strategy requirements2 that will imply detailed certification procedures.
6.1.2 Although military operational requirements with regard to positioning, navigation and timing are met in certain
national and other documents, the increasing influence of civil navigation requirements needs to be taken into
account in this Roadmap when military aircraft are flying as GAT. In the future, the continuous increase in the inte-
gration of today's diverged logical view of CNS domains and the overall airborne and ATM architecture may
influence civil-military interoperability and systems convergence.
6.1.3 The existing air navigation system and its sub-systems suffer from shortcomings in technical, operational and eco-
nomic aspects. Despite the improvements and the measures already in hand to provide further improvements, the
current system is unlikely to be able to cope with the predicted traffic increases. However, new systems and con-
cepts emerging as technology advances may offer potential improvements in terms of safety, efficiency, system
capacity and economy of flight.
6.1.4 Military users should address the technical, regulatory and institutional aspects of the application of the navigation
function within ECAC airspace and its influence on military operations.The Roadmap will concentrate, in particular,
on civil-military interoperability requirements for on-board navigation systems, navigation infrastructure and the
certification to operate as GAT in an en-route environment and flights operating at civil airports.
6.1.5 The main aspect for navigation interoperability concerning military airspace users will be a transition from equip-
ment-based certification to an alternative process based on required navigation performance values. Due attention
must be paid to the ICAO requirements imposing combinations with associated surveillance or communications
capabilities.
6.2 Military requirements for aeronautical radio navigation

6.2.1 Military forces need to know three-dimensional position, time and velocity accurately and with the assurance that
operational requirements for integrity, availability and continuity of service can be met. The degree to which these
requirements are fulfilled will directly influence the effectiveness of such forces and affect the potential outcome of
military operations. Accurate positioning, navigation and timing services need to be available worldwide. They must
be reliable and protected in all foreseeable areas of operations, including training and exercises.
6.2.2 Navigation support for military operations may be provided by one or more systems operating concurrently or in
integrated configuration optimised to the mission application; a maximum degree of safety and interoperability is nec-
essary in a multinational environment.The system(s) to be implemented should strive for maximum interoperability
with systems supporting civil land, air and maritime users. Close cooperation between military and civil organisations
responsible for navigation services is a clear objective in order to avoid later limitations for military air, land and mar-
itime movements.This would be essential in the conduct and protection of reinforcement/re-supply activities in times
of tension or war, and would offer greater utility in peace.
6.2.3 The main NATO requirements are the following:
➭ The "Policy on Navigation Services for NATO Military Operations" and "MOR on Future NATO Precision
Approach and Landing Systems (PALS)" give the specific military requirements for navigation, aircraft approach
and landing services.
➭ The "NATO Strategic Plan for Joint Navigation and Landing Systems" [Ref.: 20] states that military aircraft in any
kind of operation must be able to operate in all-weather conditions, day or night.This capability must be effec-
tive when flying at low level, with or without the support of ground-based navigation aids, within civil controlled
airspace, at civil airfields and even when conducting military training in parallel with civil traffic. A maximum
degree of safety and interoperability with civil assets should always be maintained.
2 Efforts are ongoing between ICAO, EUROCONTROL and FAA to harmonise RNP and RNAV requirements and definitions

16
NAVIGATION
6.2.4 Although NATO recognises the emergence of satellite technologies and their increasing role in the global navigation
environment, the NATO navigation infrastructure planned to support military operations still relies on the retention
of many legacy systems and can be described as follows:
➭ Short term (by 2008) - TACAN3 remains as the primary tactical navigation aid but the leverage of
integrated/hybrid GPS/INS should increase. Precision Approach Radar (PAR) is the only interoperable precision
approach system option. The trend is to replace PAR with future Precision Approach and Landing System
(PALS) options, potentially DGPS and MLS.
➭ Medium term (2008-2015) - TACAN4 will still be the primary navigation aid but the transition to GPS/INS
based systems will begin. This will be the PALS transition period, with Multi-Mode Receiver (MMR) being
installed in some military aircraft, accommodating the mix of landing systems (e.g. ILS, DGPS and/or MLS).
➭ Long term (beyond 2015) - GPS in conjunction with inertial systems will become the primary navigation aid.
PALS will include PAR, MLS and DGPS, until a single system arrives as from 2015+.
6.3 The ECAC Navigation Strategy and Implementation Plan

6.3.1 The latest ECAC Navigation Strategy has been developed under the auspices of the EUROCONTROL Airspace
and Navigation Team (ANT).
6.3.2 The Navigation Strategy is a living document which will be reviewed at intervals of four to seven years in order to
ensure that the rationale for future plans remains valid in the light of technological progress, and to take account of
the changing requirements and priorities of all stakeholders in the ECAC aviation community.
6.3.3 The Navigation Strategy identifies general principles and future actions to provide a harmonised and integrated
framework for air navigation planning in ECAC airspace for both civil and military users. It describes available and
potential air navigation applications and means of supporting these applications in terms of required performance,
functionalities, and enabling infrastructure.The EUROCONTROL ECAC Navigation Strategy addresses General Air
Traffic (GAT) operations under ICAO Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) within ECAC airspace.
6.3.4 The Navigation Strategy recognises that military users of ECAC airspace carry out operations which may not com-
ply with ICAO IFR or individual national aviation rules or procedures for GAT. However, States will continue to attach
importance to the need for their national security and defence requirements to be safeguarded and improved, what-
ever the planned developments in ATM.
6.3.5 The detailed Navigation Strategy applications and infrastructure are covered in Tables 2 and 3.
6.4 Civil-military navigation interoperability issues

6.4.1 Within the framework of this Roadmap, States may give preference to one implementation option or another in
order to reflect sub-regional and local differences within ECAC airspace.These options have to be developed in con-
tinuous consultation with the users in order to provide them with tangible and early benefits.
6.4.2 This Roadmap has considered the requirements expressed by civil and military airspace users as the main driver for
operational improvements in the navigation component of the ATM system. Due to the wide range of aircraft oper-
ator groups with diverse, specific and sometimes conflicting needs and expectations, trade-offs between conflicting
requirements have been necessary.
6.4.3 The policies and plans developed by the Member States and by various international bodies (e.g. EUROCONTROL,
the European Commission, ICAO, NATO, etc.) reflect their current commitments to deliver certain services and/or
systems.These plans are not necessarily coordinated at regional level with regard to their implementation, impact or
interoperability. In this respect, the Agency developed the ECIP/LCIP processes in order to provide a comprehensive
planning and management tool not only at harmonised pan-European level but also at national or regional levels.
3 Some military TACAN beacons may have co-located civil VOR either as a separate installation or as an integral part (VORTAC)
4 The availability of TACAN and DME channels will continue to be essential to the military until 2020 and beyond [Ref.: 24]

17
NAVIGATION
6.4.4 The introduction of regional systems such as EGNOS and the global systems of GPS, GLONASS and especially
GALILEO under the umbrella of the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) will need to be addressed.
6.4.2 The Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS)
6.4.2.1 Aviation authorities have recognised the benefits of satellite-based navigation systems. ICAO is therefore taking due
account of GNSS.The military uses GPS capacity within areas of operations and when flying in controlled airspace.
GNSS reduces the number and weight of avionics to be carried and is less dependent on ground-based navigation
systems, which could enhance the global operations of forces. That is why SBAS (Space-Based Augmentation
Systems) seem to fit the military requirements for both en-route and terminal navigation. However, in parallel with
the introduction of GNSS, a ground-based back-up might be required for the foreseeable future (e.g. comprehen-
sive DME/TACAN coverage), similar to the civil side.
6.4.2.2 Meanwhile action is being taken at NATO with a view to certification of GPS/PPS receivers in line with ICAO stan-
dards. The intention is to meet the required RNP-RNAV performance values using existing military on-board
systems (e.g. INS/IRS + GPS updates). Increasing GPS/GNSS equipage as a basis for global interoperability seems to
be the preferred solution.
6.4.3 Ground-based NAVAIDS
6.4.3.1 NATO plans to retain ground-based NAVAIDS for longer and possibly in a different way from what is foreseen in
the ECAC NAV Strategy. As the final goal, the convergence of interoperable ground-based navigation infrastructure
should be pursued.
6.4.3.2 In order to achieve civil-military interoperability through the rationalisation of ground infrastructure, the following
conditions should be taken into account:
➭ In order to cope with the widespread introduction of P-RNAV, RNP1-RNAV, 4D-RNAV and other NAV oper-
ational improvements, appropriate mechanisms must be established for the certification of military navigation
systems.These processes must measure the navigation accuracy offered, regardless of whether the systems used
are inertial, GPS, data link or others.
➭ If needed for military flying in civil controlled airspace, NAV equipage must be implemented in order to close
the remaining gaps in required NAV performance, whilst accommodating non-equipped flights with exemptions
until that capability is implemented.
➭ The infrastructure must be rationalised in a synchronised manner with the plans contained in the ECAC NAV
Strategy.
➭ The early introduction of GNSS must be supported.
6.4.4 Required Navigation Performance (RNP)
6.4.4.1 Currently, traditional regional regulations apply for the carriage of specific airborne navigation equipment. ICAO has
endorsed the concept of Required Navigation Performance (RNP), in which a specific navigation performance is
defined, but no specific navigation equipment is required. For terminal airspace and en-route, continental and ocean-
ic purposes, four RNP "types" are currently defined (RNP1, RNP4/5, RNP12.6/10, RNP20). The type number indi-
cates in miles the accuracy standard within which the aircraft will be contained for at least 95% of the total flying
time.
6.4.4.2 It is expected that when RNP is implemented in ECAC airspace in approximately 2010-2015, RNP1 will apply to
terminal airspace and RNP5 to en-route. At present, Basic RNAV (B-RNAV), which has an accuracy requirement
equivalent to RNP5, is mandated in Europe for en-route, while Precision RNAV (P-RNAV), which has an accuracy
requirement equivalent to RNP1, is recommended for terminal airspace as an interim arrangement until RNP is man-
dated (2015), because of the limitations of widely used navigation systems.

18
NAVIGATION
6.4.4.3 RNP tbd RNAV is expected to enable a reduction in route-spacing and separation criteria and provide increased
functionality, both of which will provide the opportunity for increased system capacity (possibly through the use of
closely spaced parallel routes) and reduced controller workload.
6.4.4.4 The DME infrastructure will continue to be provided until at least 2020 and will support RNP1-RNAV operations
adequately. Dual/multi-DME- and GNSS-based RNAV systems and INS/IRS with update will provide the required
navigation performance accuracy (many current RNAV systems which meet RNP1 accuracy standards cannot pro-
vide the required continuity of service and/or integrity).
6.4.5 Area navigation (RNAV)
6.4.5.1 RNAV is a method of navigation which permits aircraft operation on any desired flight path within the coverage of
referenced navigation aids or within the limits of the capability of self-contained aids, or a combination of these. 2D
RNAV relates to RNAV capabilities in the horizontal plane only; 3D RNAV includes a guidance capability in the ver-
tical plane; and 4D RNAV provides an additional timing function.The RNP determines the accuracy with which the
RNAV system is required to determine an aircraft's absolute geographical position (instead of its position relative to
a NAVAID only, as is the case with conventional VOR/DME display instruments). As from 1998, the carriage of RNAV
equipment capable of RNP5 accuracy (B-RNAV) is mandatory in the ECAC area.
6.4.5.2 The RNAV concept represents a fundamental change in navigation philosophy.Traditionally, aircraft used to fly to and
from specific NAVAIDs, using each NAVAID as a source of data. An RNAV-capable aircraft can automatically deter-
mine its position on the basis of one or more of a variety of inputs, e.g.VOR, DME, GNSS, INS. Single-sensor RNAV
systems use only one source of navigation data, such as DME stations, while multi-sensor RNAV systems monitor a
number of NAVAID systems to determine the best source of navigation data.
6.4.5.3 The RNAV system has access to a sophisticated on-board navigation database containing details of the pre-pro-
grammed routes, the airspace through which the routes pass, the NAVAIDs servicing this airspace and the depar-
ture, destination and planned diversion aerodromes.The system identifies the next waypoint on the planned route,
selects the most appropriate NAVAIDs to determine the aircraft position and usually provides steering inputs to the
autopilot.
6.4.5.4 An RNAV route can be flown automatically, with the autopilot coupled to the RNAV system, or manually, with the
RNAV system outputs displayed on the flight director/course deviation indicator, with adequate warning of speed,
altitude and track changes being provided to allow the pilot time to respond and follow the required track.
6.4.6 The required standards
6.4.6.1 The EUROCONTROL RNAV Standard [Ref.: 26] defines operational and functional requirements for RNAV equip-
ment meeting RNP5 and RNP1 accuracy (B-RNAV and P-RNAV respectively). These requirements are taken into
account in Temporary Guidance Leaflet No. 2 (TGL-2) on certification and airworthiness approval of aircraft for B-
RNAV operations in ECAC, published by the Joint Aviation Authority (JAA) in 1997, and JAA TGL-10 on P-RNAV
operations.
6.4.6.2 Global specifications for RNAV systems are contained in the RNP RNAV MASPS [Ref.: 27]. These standards are
intended for designers, manufacturers and installers of avionics equipment, service providers and users of these sys-
tems for worldwide operations. The MASPS requirements, formulated as RNPtbdRNAV, are intended to meet the
ICAO definition of RNP while providing increased integrity with repeatable and predictable navigation. The RNAV
MASPS demand increased functionality and, in particular, define system integrity requirements.
6.4.6.3 The minimum requirements set out in the EUROCONTROL Standard for B-RNAV and P-RNAV systems represent
a subset of the total system requirements, which have been defined in the MASPS on the basis of global require-
ments. A relaxation of integrity and continuity values is associated with B-RNAV and P-RNAV.This relaxation is appli-
cable only as long as reversion to conventional navigation using VOR and NDB remains available. Once the VOR and
NDB infrastructure starts to be decommissioned, operation on RNP5 and RNP1 routes will require conformance
to the RNAV MASPS.

19
NAVIGATION
6.4.6.4 The process of achieving civil-military interoperability in the navigation domain consists in considering the require-
ments described above and identifying existing capabilities or migration paths to match the performances mandat-
ed for GAT IFR operations.This process is detailed in next chapter.
6.4.7 Long-term navigation technology convergence
6.4.7.1 EUROCONTROL believes that GALILEO can offer enormous potential support for the extension of GNSS appli-
cations in aviation. It would provide an essential component of GNSS when the feasibility of "Sole Service GNSS",
which could allow the rationalisation of the existing ground navigation infrastructure, is considered. It is, however, gen-
erally agreed that further work is required in order to investigate how best to use the available GNSS components
in all phases of flight and to what degree the "sole service concept" can be applied in each phase. Moreover, the cost-
benefit which can be derived from the enhanced navigation capability and the rationalisation of the navigation infra-
structure must be established.
6.4.7.2 GALILEO, over which the Member States have sovereign control, is expected to be the catalyst for the common use
of systems and the introduction of international standards and agreements on the use of those radio navigation aids
common to trans-European multi-modal transport applications. In fact, the GALILEO radio navigation programme
will add a new level of navigation for Europe and the world, and this should also be seen as a good opportunity to
strengthen civil-military navigation interoperability.

6.5.1 In accordance with the above discussion and conclusions concerning the various aspects associated with the progress
of civil-military interoperability and integration in the field of navigation, the recommended actions are as follows:
6.5.2 Provision and maintenance of conventional military off-route (OR) and landing capability
[Action N1] In order to fulfil NATO requirements for ARNS for Allied Command Operations, Europe-wide cover-
age must be guaranteed until the end of the lifetime cycle of the following systems: NDB, VOR, ILS,
RSBN/PRMG,TACAN/DME,VORTAC, MLS.
[Action N2] Take action in order to meet B-RNAV and/or future P-RNAV navigation requirements. For en-route,
the combination of GNSS/INS (GPS and GALILEO after 2008) supported from ground RNAV systems
(DME/DME or TACAN/DME).
[Action N3] Study and ensure landing systems interoperability. JPALS (DGPS/MLS) is expected to be the means of
military aircraft landing systems interoperability. When MMR (ILS/MLS/GBAS) is implemented, civil-
military interoperability is guaranteed.
Military JPALS and civil GBAS standards should be fully compatible. It is expected that military GPS
(DGPS) receivers, considered for JPALS, will be certified to meet civil standards. Civil-military interop-
erability should be achieved in 2010 for new and retrofitted State aircraft.
6.5.3 Provision of B-RNAV and/or P-RNAV procedures at all en-route flight levels
[Action N4] The extension of the use of B-RNAV to all flight levels would not impose any additional aircraft
equipment requirements for the majority of operators. The majority of aircraft (except State aircraft)
are already required to be B-RNAV compliant in accordance with the requirements of JAA TGL No. 2
(Rev 1). However, a number of aircraft, currently operating only at lower flight levels, would be required
to carry RNAV equipment for the first time.

20
NAVIGATION
6.5.4 Tentative RNP tbd RNAV mandate
[Action N5] New aircraft entering into operation in 2008 and later will be equipped to satisfy the requirements for
RNP tbd RNAV. Older aircraft will have to be retrofitted in order to comply with the mandate for RNP
tbd RNAV operations, should such a mandate be agreed.The number of aircraft involved, and thus the
cost to operators, will be inversely proportional to the length of the period of notice given for the man-
date.The following factors will have to be considered:
confirm the minimum system performance specifications (MASPS) necessary to support the
agreed RNP tbd RNAV operations;
airworthiness certification requirements;
the accuracy, availability, integrity and reliability of navigation aids/systems;
requirements for the certification of navigation aids/systems;
certification procedures and documentation;
required functionalities.
6.5.5 Implementation of 4D RNAV
[Action N6] After 2015, the introduction of 4D RNAV operations for aircraft which have been approved for such
operations may offer significant gains in airspace system capacity and operational efficiency. 4D opera-
tions may also allow a redistribution of responsibilities between the aircraft and ATC.
The minimum aircraft requirements, specifically for 4D RNAV operations in ECAC, will be defined by
JAA.They should include:
the accuracy, integrity, reliability of navigation systems;
aircraft navigation equipment;
certification requirements, procedures and documentation;
calculator functionalities.
Most modern RNAV systems have a limited 4D capability at present, e.g. meeting a single time con-
straint to within 30 seconds in the en-route phase. 4D RNAV requires specific additional aircraft sys-
tems capabilities, such as trajectory prediction, timing constraints, etc. Advanced FMS specifies the
required functionality. Global standards should be available in the timeframe 2015-2020.
The concept of 4D RNAV operations will not place any additional requirements on the navigation infra-
structure which is expected to be available from 2015 onward (i.e. to support RNP (tbd) RNAV oper-
ations). This concept will, however, have a significant impact on the communications infrastructure and
ATM support requirements.
6.5.6 Rationalisation of the navigation infrastructure
[Action N7] The actions described in this document will allow for the development of transition/rationalisation/with-
drawal plans for existing navigation aids in order to support the transition to GNSS in the long term,
as recommended by ICAO.
This should ensure that the rationalisation of NAV infrastructures is coordinated between the civil and
military sides in order to contribute to the harmonisation of the services supported.

21
NAVIGATION
GPS stand-alone equipment is an acceptable means of compliance for B-RNAV operations, provided
that the aircraft in question also carries conventional back-up equipment (e.g.VOR or DME).The role
of military ground navigation infrastructure within the overall European RNAV environment needs to
be clarified.
The main trigger for rationalisation plans is the reduction of costs through the removal of any unnec-
essary ground navigation facilities.The main cost elements are the high maintenance costs incurred by
service providers and the consequential impact on the user charges borne by the aircraft operators. In
addition, it will be necessary to rationalise the existing ground-based navigation infrastructure in order
to achieve the full benefits offered by satellite navigation systems.
6.5.7 Continuous support of operations of aircraft with lower navigation capability
[Action N8] It is required that aircraft which are equipped with lower-capability B-RNAV equipment be provided
with support in order to enable them to continue their operations for as long as feasible.This is expect-
ed to continue until any future P-RNAV and/or RNP tbd RNAV mandate (2015).
Special arrangements may be required in order to provide the support necessary for State aircraft.
Military authorities may consider that specific military equipment meets the relevant civil navigation
requirement when certifying/qualifying military aircraft for IFR/GAT operations.
In order to support State aircraft with lower navigation capability, the following considerations should
apply:
State aircraft are assumed, as a minimum, to be capable of navigating utilising conventional

navigation aids. Until 2015, it is envisaged that sufficient conventional navigation aids will remain to
provide the necessary level of support required.
After 2015, the majority of military GAT operations are expected to use advanced navigation
systems meeting GAT/IFR requirements. Some military GAT operations may require navigation
assistance.
It will be necessary to determine, through consultation with NATO and State authorities, the level
of support necessary for operations by State aircraft.

22
Table 2
ECAC Roadmap of navigation applications

Conventional ■ VOR/DME/NDB/TACAN/VORTAC
■ Opportunity to continue operations
for State aircraft until 2015
B-RNAV ■ (Only above controlled areas
MSA/MFA/MRVA)
SIDs & STARs
P-RNAV ■ Up to 2010 - increasing applications

■ GPS (+ GALILEO after 2008) or
GPS/SBAS (GNSS/SBAS) or DME/DME
■ ECIP NAV03A, interim to RNP-RNAV
2005
RNP-RNAV ■ GPS (+ GALILEO) or GPS/SBAS or
DME/DME
■ 2015+
■ ECIP NAV05T 2010
B-RNAV ■ GPS or GPS/SBAS (GNSS/SBAS) or
DME/DME or VOR/DME
■ INS/IRS
P-RNAV ■ Up to 2010 - limited applications
■ GPS (+ GALILEO after 2008) or
En-route
GPS/SBAS (GNSS/SBAS) or
DME/DME
■ SBAS (EGNOS) after 2006
RNP-RNAV (4D) ■ GPS (+ GALILEO) or GPS/SBAS
DME/DME
■ 2015+ (a civil mandate might be in
place concerning this capability)
NPA Conventional ■ VOR/DME/NDB/TACAN/VORTAC
■ Opportunity for continuous opera-
tions for state aircraft
NPA P-RNAV ■ GPS or GPS/SBAS or DME/DME or
& RNP-RNAV ■ INS/IRS
APV RNA Baro-VNAV ■ GPS (+ GALILEO after 2008) or
& RNP RNAV Baro VNAV GPS/SBAS or DME/DME coverage
or DME with IRS)
TMA/approach
■ Requireed for State aircraft

APV I/II ■ GPS/SARPs are in place for GNSS with
augmentation (SBAS)
■ SARPs for ground-based augmentation
under development
CAT I II III Ops ■ ILS (reduced availability in support of
+ Guided To-ILS ILS CAT II or III oper. in some areas)
■ Limited channel availability (40)
■ Direct transition to GNSS is preferred

23

CAT I II III Ops ■ MLS CAT IIIB Certification in progress
MLS
+ Guided To-MLS ■ JAA TGL
CAT I Ops GPS/SBAS SBAS ■ SARPs are in place for GNSS with
(GNSS/SBAS) + GALILEO augmentation (SBAS)
CAT I Ops ■ Interoperability opportunity
TMA/approach
+ Guided To- GBAS ■ In ECAC 2009 for CAT I and 2015 for
GPS/GBAS CAT II/III
■ For approach operation as from 2006
■ SARPs for GBAS ground-based
augmentation under development
■ ECIP NAV09T tbd
CAT II & III Ops
- GPS/GBAS GBAS

24
Table 3
Navigation infrastructure for ECAC

NDB ■ NDB withdrawn before 2015 for TMA
■ NDB withdrawn around 2010 for
en-route
■ ECIP NAV06T
VOR ■ Some VOR withdrawn after 2010
■ Including military VORs
DME DME ■ DME Infrastructure maintained at least
until 2020
GPS (GLONASS) ■ GPS new signals not yet available L2C on
GPS/GLONAS 1227.6 MHz and L5 on 1176.45 MHz
(2007 and 2008)
■ (GLONASS)
■ New civil signals in space must be
validated against ICAO SARPs
GPS (GNSS)/SBAS ■ Validation against SARPs in 2005
(EGNOS) + GALILEO EGNOS/SBAS ■ Operational validation ongoing
GALILEO GALILEO ■ In 2008
GPS/GBAS + GALILEO ■ Proposed interoperability means

(CAT I -2009, CAT II/III ■ Interoperability for Cat I
2015)
MLS ■ Improves runway utilisation in
MLS
low-visibility conditions
ILS ILS ■ Interoperability means
■ Will be maintained as long as possible
TACAN TACAN MIL ■ NATO-recognised navigation system
RSBN ■ NATO-recognised navigation system in

certain states
PRMG ■ NATO-recognised navigation system in
certain states
Multi-Mode Receiver ■ Only three standards (ILS, MLS and
(MMR) GNSS with augmentation as required)
are considered
INS/IRS + update ■ On-board equipment (US government
considers it a weapon system)

25
7. SURVEILLANCE
7.1 Introduction
7.1.1 Surveillance systems are an essential element of integrated Air Traffic Management (ATM) operations serving both
civil and military users. Future systems will be capable of extracting air-derived parameters that will enhance ATM
performance and enable new forms of control, such as the delegation of separation assurance. Therefore the con-
tinuous development of safe, effective interoperable and efficient surveillance that will support the evolution of future
European ATM systems is essential.
7.1.2 ATM security in the context of possible threats from terrorist attacks will require the detection of non-cooperative
targets.Therefore surveillance should assure traditional primary surveillance or find new ways of achieving independ-
ent surveillance.
7.2 Military surveillance requirements

7.2.1 The military requirement for surveillance calls for the retention of primary surveillance radar (PSR) for the detec-
tion and tracking of non-cooperative aircraft as well as the use of secondary surveillance radar (SSR) for coopera-
tive aircraft in order to fulfil identification and separation criteria in mixed environments. These capabilities are fun-
damental to the production of the recognised air picture.The airborne early warning (E3A) component could in spe-
cific cases be part of a military surveillance infrastructure.
7.2.2 Radar data is frequently shared between civil and military units as required for ATM safety purposes and in order to
enable RAP compilation by air operation centres. An emerging requirement is for the military authorities to make a
PSR signal available in order for civil ATS units to cope with ATM security requirements (e. g. during transponder
switch-off or failure).
7.2.3 The introduction of Mode S for civil ATC surveillance does not satisfy the NATO operational requirement for an
improved IFF capability, which is required to be secure and resistant to jamming. NATO therefore has no operational
requirement for Mode S other than peacetime air surveillance support. For that purpose, NATO military aircraft
should be able to fly unrestricted in Mode S airspace and command and control systems should be able to acquire
Mode S data/information.
7.2.4 NATO recognises that the carriage and operation of Mode S transponders in military aircraft will be necessary to
facilitate access to the airspace in which ATC is provided by civil ATS units.
7.2.5 In addition, NATO's military authorities put forward a requirement for the acquisition and distribution of Mode S
data for the safe coordination and control of aircraft and in order to assist military air operation centres to produce
RAP. Mode S data required for military purposes can either be derived from civil sources or obtained from military
Mode S interrogators.
7.2.6 PSR and SSR are currently able to fulfil military surveillance-related requirements for long-term enhanced surveil-
lance and will, following the adoption and implementation of future concepts be supported by techniques such as
Mode S and ADS-B, become a major front end enabler of ATM operational improvements. Although ADS-B is not
likely to become the "sole means", military impacts are expected with the introduction of new ATM concepts such
as "enhanced surveillance", "intent-based ATM" and "cooperative separation assurance".
7.3 The EUROCONTROL Surveillance Strategy

7.3.1 General
7.3.1.1 The current Surveillance Strategy for ECAC [Ref.: 4], dated November 2005, has been endorsed by the EUROCON-
TROL Surveillance Team. The new Surveillance Strategy details the operational and technical environment relevant
at a specific period and discusses the surveillance infrastructure required to enable this environment. Inevitably the
accuracy of the Surveillance Strategy is higher in the short term than in the longer term.Therefore, the Surveillance
Strategy up to 2015 is considered "mature" but the later strategy is still under discussion.

26
SURVEILLANCE
7.3.1.2 Two principal sources of information have been used. First of all, the European Convergence and Implementation
Plan (ECIP) Level II provides a set of agreed actions which will be carried out over the coming years. Secondly, there
are the Strategic Performance Framework (SPF) Operational Improvement clusters, which are grouped in terms of
➭ network efficiency;
➭ airport operations;
➭ sector productivity;
➭ safety net.
7.3.1.3 Requirements are emerging relating to ATM Security. These requirements could imply primary coverage in all air-
space. The need to maintain an independent surveillance system to track non-cooperative targets in TMA and en-
route is one of the fundamental principles valid throughout the strategy period. For that purpose PSR will be main-
tained where and when required.
7.3.2 The Surveillance Strategy from today to 2010
7.3.2.1 The operational environment in 2010 will be fundamentally the same as in 2005. Ground service providers will
remain responsible for maintaining separation. Civil aircraft will continue to fly fixed routes and will be cleared by the
ground prior to any manoeuvre (in normal operations). However, there will be limited implementation of the
extended use of the Flexible Use of Airspace Concept with dynamic airspace management. There will be an
increased reliance by controllers on aircraft-derived data and automated ATM tools for conflict prediction, with tools
such as Short-Term Conflict Alert (STCA) or Medium-Term Conflict Alert (MTCA).
7.3.2.2 The principal technical solution for en-route surveillance remains secondary radar (conventional SSR and SSR Mode
S). For TMA operations SSR radars are supplemented by PSR. However, by 2010 it is envisaged that, following the
recommendations of ICAO ANC/11, limited pockets of ADS-B use in Europe and worldwide will be implemented.
7.3.2.3 The ADS-B data link agreement between Europe and the US, whereby both adopted Mode S SSR 1090 extended
squitter as the basis for interoperability, will result in this becoming the "de facto" standard throughout ECAC. Local
applications, such as VDL Mode 4, UAT or others as the ADS-B data link, may be implemented but global solutions
are clearly preferred to limit costs. Limited operational use of wide-area multilateration will take place in ECAC,
where sufficient dual radar coverage is not available. Surveillance data sharing using IP (e.g. through RADNET and
civil/military exchanges) will be on the increase.
7.3.2.4 Surveillance information has a high impact on safety and security. Consequently, EUROCONTROL should consider
investigating whether there is a requirement that, by 2010, a move towards secure (e.g. encrypted) ground-ground
communications will be necessary.
7.3.2.5 There is concern that the 1030 MHz and 1090 MHz frequencies will become severely impacted by RF pollution (and
therefore unsafe) by 2015. SSR interrogations and TCAS take up a significant proportion of the 1090 MHz band-
width. A number of proposals to reduce the problem (such as TCAS hybrid surveillance, where the TCAS interro-
gation rate is reduced when ADS-B or more sensitive ground receivers are present) have been proposed. In addi-
tion, the problem can be significantly alleviated if SSR interrogations are reduced by scaling down SSR infrastructure
(when the end of the radar operational life occurs) and an information-sharing culture is encouraged between users.
7.3.3 The Surveillance Strategy from 2010 to 2015
7.3.3.1 At the end of the 2010-2015 period, the ground system will continue to be responsible for separation of aircraft.
The evolution of the surveillance environment will be driven by enhanced medium-term planning, with the tasks of
the controllers operating in en-route and TMA sectors becoming increasingly supported by more automation (e.g.
decision support tools). The controller will make use of more ADD to provide a more accurate view of the situa-
tion and improvements in safety nets. The detection of possible conflicts between flights from five to 15 minutes
ahead will be supported by MTCD capabilities and the generation of automated proposals for conflict resolution.

27
SURVEILLANCE
7.3.3.2 Partial delegation (to the pilot) for spacing is envisaged and flight data processing systems will be upgraded to pro-
vide full 4D trajectory prediction aligned with the capabilities of 4D FMS. Security and air defence remains a key
requirement.
7.3.3.3 There is concern that the co-dependence of navigation and surveillance will result in a potentially unsafe situation.
This may occur when independent position measurement (by radars) is replaced by downlinking GNSS or inertial
position via ADS-B. Therefore the Surveillance Strategy maintains the need for an independent ground-based sys-
tem for aircraft position verification.
7.3.3.4 The air situation picture used by the aircrew whilst performing spacing application may have significant safety require-
ments (i.e. high integrity and reliability). However, because the controller still maintains separation, the integrity of the
system may not be any higher than TCAS requirements. If, however, it is more critical than TCAS, an independent
validation mechanism for the position and identification of aircraft may be needed in order to ensure that the pic-
ture is accurate. One option is to deliver the ground picture to the aircraft in order to validate the ADS-B picture.
This may be provided via a Traffic Information Service-Broadcast (TIS-B).
7.3.3.5 Surveillance information is influential in the area of safety and security. Consequently, there is a requirement that by
2015 a move towards secure air-ground, ground-air and air-air communications (e.g. encrypted) should be
considered.
7.3.3.6 By 2015 the surveillance system will require for en-route and TMA a ground-based system, independent from nav-
igation and FMS in the aircraft, constituted by conventional SSR, SSR Mode S or Multilateration supplemented by
PSR in TMAs. However, it is predicted that by 2015 some SSR and SSR Mode S systems may be approaching the
end of their life cycle.
7.3.4 The Surveillance Strategy from 2015 to 2020
7.3.4.1 The limited delegation of the separation task from controllers to pilots is underway in low- and medium-density air-
space. This will require additional avionics infrastructure and additional tools for the controller. The ground system
continues to require non-cooperative target detection (in order to track targets when there is an avionics failure and
for air defence purposes). The requirement for independent ground-based verification of the aircraft position and
cooperative surveillance to provide aircraft-derived data to controllers and to automated systems will continue.This
will be enabled respectively by SSR and/or SSR Mode S or Multilateration and ADS-B. PSR will continue to be pro-
vided within TMA and approach as a minimum.
7.3.4.2 With the implementation of Aircraft Separation Assurance System (ASAS) self-separation applications, additional
information will be presented to the controller (for example, the display of separation assurance information). The
widespread introduction of preferred routing will require flight information (for example, trajectory change points
and the selected route) to be displayed to the controller in real time. This information may be transmitted to the
ground by the surveillance system.
7.3.4.3 ASAS self-separation will require the addition of automated tools in the cockpit and the transmission of more infor-
mation via ADS-B. It is likely that the aircraft systems will require an upgrade to existing ASAS package 1 infrastruc-
ture in order to provide higher integrity and additional functionality.
7.3.4.4 It is predicted that by 2020 the majority of the conventional SSR and SSR Mode S systems currently installed are at
the end of their operational life.

28
SURVEILLANCE
7.4 Civil-military surveillance interoperability
7.4.1 For both civil and military CNS/ATM, radar will remain a leading technology for surveillance in the medium term.
However, the requirements to change ATM services towards more Cooperative Decision-Making (CDM) process-
es demand new technology based on data sharing rather than non-cooperative or cooperative surveillance.
7.4.2 The process of achieving civil-military interoperability in the surveillance domain is to consider the requirements
described below and to identify existing capabilities or migration paths to match the performances mandated for
GAT IFR operations.This process is detailed in the next chapter within the Recommended Actions.
7.4.2 Mode S and its interoperability with State aircraft
7.4.2.1 Mode S is a requirement which is exerting considerable influence on the interoperability of State aircraft aiming to
fly in Mode S-dedicated airspace. Below are described the latest Mode S Harmonisation of the Transition
Arrangements for State aircraft as approved by the EUROCONTROL Provisional Council [Ref: 40].
7.4.2.2 Mode S Elementary Surveillance - IFR and VFR airborne equipment
7.4.2.2.1 For all State aircraft flying in Mode S-designated airspace, the final date of compliance for the carriage and
operation of Mode S Elementary Surveillance airborne equipment is 31 March 2009.
7.4.2.2.2 This requirement is also valid for VFR flights conducted in Mode S-designated airspace where the carriage and
operation of SSR transponders is already mandatory.
7.4.2.2.3 The Mode S transponder must comply with the provisions of ICAO Annex 10, SARPs, Amendment 77. It must
be an approved Mode S Level 2 transponder, as a minimum, compliant with JAA Technical Standard Order
JTSO-2C112a, or an equivalent standard compliant with the relevant ICAO SARPs and which is acceptable to
the approval authority. It also includes aircraft identification. The transponders need to support Surveillance
Identifier Codes.
7.4.2.2.4 This rule is equally valid for State aircraft operating frequently or only occasionally (less than 30 hours per air-
frame per annum) in designated Mode S airspace.
7.4.2.3 Mode S Enhanced Surveillance - airborne equipment
7.4.2.3.1 Mode S Enhanced Surveillance builds upon the benefits of Elementary Surveillance and consists of the extrac-
tion of additional airborne data in the form of Downlink Airborne Parameters (DAP).This facilitates an increase
in the safety and efficiency of ATM operations.
7.4.2.3.2 The carriage and operation of Mode S Enhanced Surveillance functionality applies to "transport-type" State
aircraft with a maximum take-off mass in excess of 5,700 kg or a maximum true cruising airspeed in excess
of 250 kts and "full" DAP capability, conducting IFR flights as GAT in Mode S Enhanced designated airspace
for more than 30 hours per airframe.The final date of compliance for the carriage and operation of Mode S
Enhanced Surveillance airborne equipment is 31 March 2009.
7.4.3 Long-term surveillance technology convergence

7.4.3.1 The evolution of ground-based surveillance from today's conventional cooperative SSR to a future dependent means
will happen progressively as enabled by the introduction of high-capacity surveillance technologies.
7.4.3.2 Military airspace users should monitor the evolution of existing radar-based surveillance systems to advanced sur-
veillance systems which will enable the reception of more data directly from the aircraft, thus allowing controllers to
provide a better service and offering information of potential military interest. This information relates to real-time
knowledge of the state of the aircraft and of its intended path.

29
SURVEILLANCE
7.4.3.3 The first step, termed Enhanced Surveillance, is associated with the state and identity, particularly air state (air speed
and heading) and the one intent parameter (selected altitude). Enhanced Surveillance is thus establishing a capabili-
ty for future development steps. A second step, later on, once concepts and requirements have matured and evi-
dence and experience have been acquired, will be evolution towards intent-based ATM.
7.4.3.4 Finally, as far as the delegation of separation assurance to the aircrew and the possible autonomy of flight is con-
cerned, these concepts do not relate to surveillance itself but rather to Cooperative Separation Assurance. These
applications will bring major changes to the fundamental principles of ATM and will use emerging techniques such
as ADS-B,TIS-B and multilateration.
7.4.3.5 It is expected that the future communication infrastructure will be able to support some of these surveillance appli-
cations and thus, as the main enabler of civil-military technological convergence, contribute to the introduction of
these advanced concepts to military platforms and systems as appropriate.

7.5.1 In accordance with the above discussion and conclusions concerning the various aspects associated with the progress
of civil-military interoperability and integration in the field of surveillance, the recommended actions are as follows:
7.5.2 Radar data provision and sharing
[Action S1] Air defence and security concerns remain high, implying the continued need to detect renegade5
targets. Where security considerations permit, therefore, radar data sharing is highly recommended for
security and safety reasons. It could cover all types of surveillance data, including 3D and Mode S.
Firm processes must be established to optimise the sharing of civil air traffic control (ATC) and military
(ATC/air defence) surveillance information.
[Action S2] A number of technical improvements to enhance air navigation security must be considered in the light
of the evolution of the Surveillance Strategy.These may include the reconsideration, in some instances,
of current planning for the decommissioning of civil and military ATC primary radars.
7.5.3 Provision of PSR
[Action S3] The provision of PSR has always been envisaged only for major terminal areas and not for en-route.
This was mainly driven by financial principles and because the regulators are not requesting the provi-
sion of non-cooperative targets. However, the current version of the Surveillance Strategy takes into
account ATM security requirements that entail the need to maintain PSR where and when required.
7.5.4 Provision of SSR
[Action S4] The provision of SSR must be conducted in accordance with the contents of the EUROCONTROL
Surveillance Strategy, i.e. SSR must be applied as the primary means of surveillance for en-route and
TMA in the short and medium term. It will later be replaced by Mode S SSR and other techniques.
After some local implementations for the future, it is expected that other techniques, such as ADS-B
and multilateration, will also be deployed.
7.5.5 Provision of Mode S
[Action S5] All State aircraft flying in Mode S-designated airspace need to comply with the final date of compliance for
the carriage and operation of Mode S Elementary Surveillance airborne equipment, i.e. 31 March 2009.
[Action S6] The carriage and operation of Mode S Enhanced Surveillance functionality applies to "transport-type"
State aircraft with a maximum take-off mass in excess of 5,700 kg or a maximum true cruising airspeed
in excess of 250 kts and a "full" DAP capability, conducting IFR flights as GAT in Mode S Enhanced des-
ignated airspace for more than 30 hours per airframe.The final date of compliance for the carriage and
operation of Mode S Enhanced Surveillance airborne equipment is 31 March 2009.
5 Renegade - defined as a civil platform that is assessed as operating in such a manner as to raise suspicion that it might be used as a weapon to perpetrate a
terrorist attack.

30
SURVEILLANCE
7.5.6 Provision of ground and mobile Mode S surveillance
[Action S7] For ground surveillance provision specifically, interrogation with Mode S Interrogator Codes (IC) allo-
cation is very complex and therefore the necessary civil-military coordination needs to be reserved in
order to follow the agreed procedures and using the applicable EUROCONTROL working arrange-
ments. The appropriate coordination should also be respected for the operation of mobile platforms
equipped with interrogators.
7.5.7 Multilateration provision and sharing
[Action S8] Developments related to the coexistence of multilateration with the rest of the surveillance infrastruc-
ture need to be closely monitored in order to verify their impact on civil-military interoperability. Such
a new system has been the focus of recent EUROCONTROL activities, with ongoing standardisation
and certification activities taking place for both airport and en-route wide-area systems.
7.5.8 Long Term Surveillance Technology Convergence
[Action S9] Study implementation of emerging SUR techniques like ADS-B to support advanced ATM concepts in
military platforms from 2010 (ADS-B Package 1).

31
Table 4
Surveillance Interoperability Roadmap

PSR En-Route ■ Primary signal provided for ATM
security and coordination
■ General decommissioning should be
revised owing to security
PSR Major TMA ■ Single PSR coverage for safety reasons
in Major TMA
SSR ■ Double conventional SSR (MSSR)
coverage required
■ SSR Mode 3/A C
SSR Mode S ELS ■ All State Aircraft flying in Mode S
En-Route and Major TMA
Airspace to be equipped with

transponders
SSR Mode S EHS ■ Certain type of State Aircraft flying in
Mode S Airspace to be equipped
ADS-B ■ Deployment of ADS-B based on 1090
MHz. Local deployment of ADS-B
based on VDL Mode 4 might have
been implemented
TIS-B ■ To deliver the ground picture to the
aircraft
Wide Area ■ Deployment of Wide area Multi-
Multi-Lateration Lateration systems making use of
1090 MHZ transmissions (SSR,
Mode S, 1090 Extented Squitter
(ADS-B) and Short Squitter (ACAS)
Military IFF ■ NATO IFF standards
Surface Movement Radar ■ Primary detection of targets on the

airport
Airport
Airport Multi-Lateration ■ Deployment of Airport Multi-

Lateration systems making use of 1090
MHZ transmissions, including vehicles,
to support A-SMGCS

32
8. CERTIFICATION ISSUES
8.1 Introduction
8.1.1 Proper certification processes need to be agreed for civil and military aircraft to be certified for airworthiness when
flying in ECAC airspace.
8.1.2 For example, in the field of navigation, regulatory authorities required the carriage of specific airborne equipment.
This is no longer desirable, the aim should be to promote operational performance instead of performance based
on certain types of equipage. ICAO has endorsed the concept of Required Navigation Performance (RNP), which
is a statement of aircraft navigation performance defined in terms of the accuracy, integrity, availability and continu-
ity of service necessary for operations within a defined airspace, without requiring specific navigation equipment.
8.2 European civil and military certification issues

8.2.1 The European Commission established EASA, the Agency responsible for the airworthiness and environmental com-
patibility of civil aeronautical products.The Community will have exclusive competence in these fields.
8.2.2 The intention is to cover the entire field of aviation safety needs by means of common rules implemented by a single reg-
ulator. EASA will therefore become the cornerstone of Community policy in this field.The Commission will extend the
common rules to include air operations and flight crew licensing. In this way, nearly all the rules which have been devel-
oped by the JAA will be incorporated into Community law and will be applied uniformly throughout the Community.
8.2.3 Aviation safety also means the safety of airport operations and air traffic management.The Commission will therefore be
initiating work immediately to have these areas covered by Community rules as well.This work will be carried out togeth-
er with EASA and in particular with EUROCONTROL, whose experience and expertise in this field are essential.
8.2.4 Civil-military CNS/ATM interoperability requires some form of harmonised approach rather than purely national ones.
EASA has neither a mandate nor any intention of looking at the airworthiness of State aircraft.When military aircraft are
flying as GAT, similar processes should be considered. Common agreed acceptance procedures were applied in the EURO-
CONTROL RVSM programme for both civil and State aircraft. Although RVSM concerned only a limited type of military
transport aircraft, it shows a way forward which could be accepted and followed by the military authorities.
8.3 A harmonised approach to the certification of military aircraft

8.3.1 Military organisations generally have the authority to "self-certify" their own aircraft (e.g. navigation equipment).
However, acceptance of foreign military self-certification is at the discretion (in accordance with ICAO) of the States
into and over whose territories such flights are made.
8.3.2 Absence of civil certification of military system performance disqualifies on-board military systems from being used
in the civil environment, even if they offer superior levels of navigation accuracy.
8.3.3 Within the EUROCONTROL institutional framework, a civil-military regulatory initiative is required in order to put
in place the mechanisms to run a certification process, or equivalent, for military navigation systems, with a view to
obtain recognition of some level of "ICAO/MASPS" capability.The level of accuracy should be expressed in terms of
performance (e.g. RNP) capability independently of supporting avionics or ground infrastructure.
8.3.4 NATO is investigating the potential Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) certification of navigation systems using military PPS
GPS systems.
8.3.5 As described in the Chicago Convention, military aircraft do not have to be certified by national civil aviation authorities
in order to fly in civil airspace.The military authorities which take responsibility for stating that a specific aircraft is com-
pliant with civil aviation standards provide this certification.The evolution of air traffic and of navigation aids leads to more
and more stringent performances in the navigation systems on board military aircraft. More specifically, the certification
of navigation systems using PPS GPS raises a problem, since civil aviation authorities recognise only SPS GPS.
8.3.6 The main objective of this effort is to develop guidelines to help individual military authorities certifying their sys-
tems for GAT/IFR.

33
9. SPECTRUM ISSUES
9.1 Introduction
9.1.1 Many airborne systems require the use of dedicated spectrum in order, for example, to land during adverse weath-
er conditions or low visibility, or to maintain safe separation between aircraft.The reality shows growing congestion
of spectrum bands as a result of the introduction of new communications technologies and increasing competition
for new allocations as a result of the booming growth of mobile telecommunications.
9.1.2 The success of civil-military CNS/ATM interoperability initiatives will depend to a great extent on the protection of
the aeronautical spectrum presently in use and future access to interference-free radio frequencies as required to
support new systems which will be the cornerstone of technology convergence between civil and military
CNS/ATM systems.
9.1.3 Military requirements dictate particular needs in terms of spectrum support. These might collide with overall avia-
tion needs, which would then need to be harmonised.This should be done by congregating civil and military strate-
gies and positions on spectrum-related matters, as foreseen in the existing NATO-EUROCONTROL Memorandum
of Cooperation and in the "New Mechanism for Management, Assignment and Audit of the Use of Aviation Radio
Spectrum", which has been established in accordance with a decision of the European Ministers of Transport.
9.2 Working arrangements in the spectrum domain

NATO
9.2.1 The NATO Military Operational Requirement for use of Radio Frequency Spectrum addresses the basic NATO
requirements in terms of frequency and spectrum allocations.
9.2.2 The NATO Joint Civil/Military Frequency Agreement (NJFA) is a joint agreement between civil and military author-
ities of NATO nations on the use of spectrum for military purposes in support of NATO operations. It sets out the
military spectrum requirements which NATO nations agree to accept by reflecting such needs in national allocation
tables as far as possible. It includes both NATO requirements for spectrum access and national military requirements
in support of NATO. In addition, in order to satisfy the requirement for mobility and interoperability of forces, and
to improve commonality in spectrum utilisation for military operations and efficiency in border areas, it designates
harmonised NATO bands for military use throughout NATO Europe.
9.2.3 NATO shares a common interest with aviation in aircraft operations and associated use of the aeronautical spec-
trum. The NATO Civil/Military Frequency Management Sub-Committee (NATO FMSC) acts as the focal point and
sole competent source of advice and decisions on these matters within the Alliance.The NATO FMSC is support-
ed by staff of the Spectrum Management Branch (SMB) at NATO Headquarters in Brussels. All NATO nations send
both military and civil representatives, the latter representing the civil aviation administrations of NATO nations, to
the NATO FMSC. The NATO FMSC responds directly to the Military Committee (MC) on matters of an urgent
operational nature falling within its area of responsibility.
Civil Aviation
9.2.4 The ECAC Ministers of Transport recognised that radio frequency spectrum is a scarce resource for which demand
is constantly increasing.They called on EUROCONTROL, in close cooperation with ICAO, to address the need for
a strong mechanism for aviation spectrum management, aviation frequency assignment and auditing of the use of avi-
ation spectrum within the airspace of ECAC States.
9.2.5 As a consequence of the setting-up of this mechanism, a high-level independent group known as the Spectrum
Frequency Consultation Group (SFCG) was established. This group is supported by EUROCONTROL and ICAO
and is in charge of the development of the European Aeronautical Spectrum Strategy (EASS) and Aeronautical
European Common Position (AECP). It is composed of representatives of all stakeholders, including the military. It
considers current policy and strategic issues relating to spectrum and frequency management, including military
requirements.

34
SPECTRUM ISSUES
9.2.6 Even though the ultimate ownership of spectrum resides with each State's administration, bands allocated to avia-
tion are internationally coordinated by the world administrations participating in the World Radiocommunication
Conferences (WRCs) of the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), at which more than 180 States are rep-
resented.The preparatory process for WRC discussions involves numerous communities of spectrum users and, on
the aviation side, organisations such as ICAO, the European Commission, CEPT, industry, etc., attempting to influence
the whole process.
9.2.7 In this complex institutional framework, the appropriate process for ensuring that the required spectrum for systems
enabling civil-military CNS/ATM interoperability is globally accepted and protected consists, prior to the WRC, in
taking military concerns into consideration in the development of the AECP which is to be defended by the States
at the WRC.
9.2.8 This Roadmap therefore promotes active military participation in the AECP development process, which takes place
within the SFCG.
9.3 Aeronautical spectrum constraints and opportunities

9.3.1 As mentioned above, lack of spectrum availability has the potential to severely constrain any CNS implementations.
The following bands in particular might at least constrain CNS requirements, both civil and military, and their inter-
national status should therefore be closely monitored in order to ensure that any new implementation or interop-
erability measures are not affected by a lack of frequency support.
➭ VHF ATC navigation (108-117.975 MHz): in this band, ICAO standard systems such as VOR and ILS are
supported. Such services continue to be essential in order to provide approach and landing services for mili-
tary airspace users; the protection of this band should therefore be ensured.
➭ VHF ATC communications (118.-137 MHz): this band is highly congested in much of Europe. In order to cope
with this situation, Europe has promoted a new standard based on 8.33 kHz channel spacing.
According to some studies, the process of migration from 25 to 8.33 kHz is forecast to reach its limits by 2015.
It is also thought that air-ground mobile communication will mainly be provided at that time via data link, with
voice communications reserved for certain tactical communications.
Military-specific requirements in this band are described only as "civilian ATC performed by military" or "ability
to provide ATC for civilian aircraft".This requirement is not expected to change in the future.
➭ Military A/G communications for off-route (138-144 MHz): this band supports the handling of military aircraft
flying as Operational Air Traffic (OAT) or General Air Traffic (GAT). In some countries the full range up to 150
or 160 MHz is used for military A/G/A requirements. Cooperation between NATO and non-NATO air forces
relies heavily on the availability of this military band.
➭ Military UHF communications (225-400 MHz): this band is essential for NATO's air forces. It is used primari-
ly for line-of-sight tactical ground communications, A/G/A, A/A voice and data links. Its use includes telemetry
communications for UAVs, UHF tactical satellite and tactical radio relay networks.
Future military communications requirements will rely heavily on the UHF spectrum, including the needs of
deployable forces, ACCS requirements and advanced technologies which will be used for military purposes.
There are initiatives to extend UHF A/G/A coverage to new NATO and PfP nations.This initiative is progress-
ing towards recognition of the 225-400 MHz band as a harmonised military band throughout Europe. UHF
frequencies have traditionally been lent to civil ANSPs to be implemented in support of ATC services provid-
ed to military aircraft which are not VHF capable.
➭ Aeronautical radio navigation (960-1215MHz): the L-band supports fundamental services for both civil and
military aviation.These are based on the operation of systems such as DME,TACAN, SSR, PSR, ACAS, Mode S,
IFF and some bands of GPS and GALILEO. JTIDS/MIDS Link 16 uses a set of 51 frequencies in this band, but
also on a non-interference basis. It is vital to keep aviation interests in this band.

35
SPECTRUM ISSUES
➭ Future spectrum allocations: the agenda for the next ITU WRC contains one item of relevance to aeronauti-
cal communications, as it paves the way for the allocation of a new radio band for aeronautical mobile commu-
nications. This item aims "to consider allocations for the aeronautical mobile (Route) service in parts of the bands
between 108 MHz and 6 GHz and to study current frequency allocations which will support the modernisation of
civil aviation telecommunication systems".
9.3.2 If these spectrum allocations are agreed at the next WRC, the introduction of a future communication system will
be facilitated, thus enabling many ATM operational improvements, including security applications. The advent of this
new generation of communications systems will offer military aviation a unique opportunity to increase the integra-
tion of systems and pursue effective long-term civil and military technological convergence.

36
10. OTHER AERONAUTICAL SYSTEMS

REQUIREMENTS
10.1 General
10.1.1 Various other requirements additional to those extensively discussed in this Roadmap have been mandated for or
are planned to operations within ECAC airspace. Hey have not been fully considered in this document either
because of its limited impact in civil-military interoperability or because they are not categorised as CNS but more
related to safety assurance.
10.1.2 The additional avionics requirements that have been considered in that situation include, for example, a navigation-
related mandate like RVSM, safety assurance systems linked with SSR Mode S like ACAS and FM Immunity to pro-
tect VHF systems, VOR and ILS receivers from harmful interferences. The option was not to conduct in this docu-
ment an in depth discussion of its military impacts but for completeness a table has bee inserted, as annex A, describ-
ing some known avionics requirements, other than CNS, and providing some information on its applicability to State
aircraft.
10.2 Future flight management systems (FMSs)

10.2.1 Around 2020, integrated modular avionics (IMA) will be extremely widespread.This will enable FMS capabilities well
beyond the current scope of navigation. In effect, the flight management system will become a complex function
managing a large number of aircraft and flight operation aspects including navigation, communications and surveil-
lance. This function is likely to be distributed through the airborne network, allowing full interoperability with the
underlying avionics functions.
10.2.2 Such capabilities will be software-intensive and upgradeable in order to allow the logic of trajectory negotiation and
other complex sub-functions to be updated and added as the operational concepts evolve. The IMA concept may
allow for faster upgrades across the whole fleet, enabling the ATC solution to evolve with the fleet.
10.2.3 It is also expected that the flight management function will rely on standard models for many aspects, thus enabling
common understanding when sharing information among the future ATM system actors.
10.2.4 The functionalities of future FMSs will certainly include standard generic aircraft performance models, advanced tra-
jectory predictions, standard descriptions of flight intent, standard weather models to share meteorological informa-
tion, etc.
10.2.5 It can easily be concluded that such a paradigm in the area of future FMSs will raise new challenges, from a techni-
cal and economic perspective, for civil-military interoperability, particularly in the area of avionics integration, in order
to ensure the coherence of the overall model and architecture.

37
11. GLOSSARY
11.1 Abbreviations
ACARS Aircraft Communication and Reporting System
ACAS Airborne Collision Avoidance System
ACC Area Control Centre
ACCS Air Command and Control System (NATO)
ACL ATC Clearance
ACM ATC Communications Management
AD Air Defence
ADD Aircraft-Derived Data
ADEXP ATS Data Exchange Protocol
ADF Automatic Direction Finder
ADS Automatic Dependent Surveillance (C - Contract, B - Broadcast)
AECP Aeronautical European Common Position
AFTN Aeronautical Fixed Telecommunications Network
AIS Aeronautical Information Services
AMC ATC Microphone Check
AMHS Aeronautical Message Handling System
ANC Air Navigation Conference (ICAO)
ANSP Air Navigation Service Provider
AOA ACARS over AVLC
AOC Airline Operational Communications
APV Approach Procedure with Vertical Guidance
AP17 Action Plan 17 of MoU between EUROCO)NTROL and FAA (Future Communications Study)
ARNS Aeronautical Radionavigation Service
ASAS Aircraft Separation Assurance System
ASDE Airfield Surface Detection Equipment
A-SMGCS Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System
ASTERIX All-Purpose Structured EUROCONTROL Surveillance Information Exchange
ATC Air Traffic Control
ATCO Air Traffic Controller
ATFCM Air Traffic Flow and Capacity Management
ATIS Automatic Terminal Information System
ATM Air Traffic Management
ATN Aeronautical Telecommunications Network (ICAO concept)
ATS Air Traffic Services
ATSAW Air Traffic Situational Awareness
AUTOPS Autonomous Operations
AVLC Aviation VHF Link Control
AWACS Airborne Warning and Control System
BLOS Beyond Line Of Sight
B-RNAV Basic RNAV (RNP 5)
C2 Command and Control
C3 (Political) Consultation Command and Control (formerly known as Command Control and Communications)
CASCADE Co-operative ATS through Surveillance & Communication Applications Deployed in ECAC
CDM Collaborative Decision-Making
CDMA Code Division Multiple Access
CEPT Conférence Européenne des Postes et Télécommunications

38
GLOSSARY
CFMU Central Flow Management Unit
CIDIN Common ICAO Data Interchange Network
CIS Communication and Information Systems (NATO)
CNS Communications, Navigation and Surveillance
COM Communications
COOPATS Cooperative ATS
COSEP Cooperative Separation
COTS Commercial Off-The-Shelf
CPDLC Controller-Pilot Data Link Communications
CTR Control Area
DAP Downlink Airborne Parameters
D-ATIS Data Link ATIS
DCA Designated Controlled Airspace
DCL Departure Clearance
DGPS Differential GPS
DLIC Data Link Initiation Capability
DME Distance Measuring Equipment
DSC Downstream Clearance
EANPG European Air Navigation Planning Group (ICAO)
EASA European Aviation Safety Agency
EASS European Aeronautical Spectrum Strategy
EATMP European Air Traffic Management Programme
ECAC European Civil Aviation Conference
ECC Exemption Coordination Cell
ECG EATMP Communications Gateway
ECIP European Convergence and Implementation Plan
ELS Elementary Surveillance (Mode S)
EHS Enhanced Surveillance (Mode S)
ERRIDS European Regional Renegade Information Dissemination System
EXTRA European Cross-Border Transport Network for ANSPs
FAA Federal Aviation Administration
FANS Future Air Navigation System
FCI Future Communications Infrastructure
FCS Future Communications Study
FDPS Flight Data Processing System
FIS Flight Information Service
FLIPCY Flight Plan Consistency
FMS Flight Management System
FPALS Future Precision Approach and Landing Systems
FPL Flight Plan
FRUIT False Replies Unsynchronised in Time
GA General Aviation
GAT General Air Traffic
GATM Global Air Traffic Management (United States Air Force)
GBAS Ground-Based Augmentation System
GNSS Global Navigation Satellite System
GPS Global Positioning System
GPWS Ground Proximity Warning System

39
GLOSSARY
HF High Frequency
IC Interrogator Code (Mode S)
ICAO International Civil Aviation Organisation
IER Information Exchange Requirements
IFF Identification Friend or Foe
IFPS Initial Flight (Plan) Processing System
IFR Instrument Flight Rules
II Interrogator Identifier (Mode S code)
ILS Instrument Landing System
IMA Integrated Modular Avionics
INS Inertial Navigation System
IP Internet Protocol
IRS Inertial Reference System
ISO International Standards Organisation
ITU International Telecommunications Union
JAA Joint Aviation Authority
JPALS Joint Precision Approach and Landing Systems
JTIDS/MIDS Joint Tactical Information Distribution System/Multifunctional Information Distribution System
JTRS Joint Tactical Radio System
JTSO JAA Technical Standard Order
LAN Local Area Network
LCIP Local Convergence and Implementation Plan
MASPS Minimum Aircraft Systems Performance Specifications (ICAO)
MILT Military Team
MLS Microwave Landing System
MMHS Military Message Handling System
MMR Multimode Receiver
MNS Mobile Network Services
MOPS Minimum Operation[al] Performance Specifications
MOR Military Operational Requirement
MSSR Monopulse SSR
MTCD Medium-Term Conflict Detection
NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organisation
NDB Non-Directional Beacon
NOTAM Notice to Airmen
NPA Non-Precision Approach
OAT Operational Air Traffic
ODIAC Operational Development for Integrated Air-Ground Data Communication Services
OLDI On-Line Data Interchange
OSI Open Systems Interconnection
PA Precision Approach
PALS Precision Approach and Landing System
PAR Precision Approach Radar
PENS Pan-European Network Services
PfP Partnership for Peace
PPS Precise Positioning Service
PRMG Approach and Landing Radio Beacon Group System (co-located with RSBN)
PSR Primary Surveillance Radar

40
GLOSSARY
QSIG Quality Signalling (Telephony Protocol)
RADNET Radar Data Exchange Network
RAIM Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring
RAP Recognised Air Picture
RCP Required Communications Performance
RNAV Area Navigation
RNP Required Navigation Performance
RSP Required Surveillance Performance
RVA Recorded Voice Announcement
RVSM Reduced Vertical Separation Minima
RSBN Radionavigacionaya Systema Bliznoj Navigacii (Tactical Navigation Azimuth/Range System)
SAR Search and Rescue
SARPS Standards and Recommended Practices (ICAO)
SATCOM Satellite Communications
SBAS Space-Based Augmentation System
SDR Software-Defined Radio
SFCG Spectrum Frequency Consultation Group
SI Surveillance Identifier (Mode S code)
SPS Standard Positioning Service
SSR Secondary Surveillance Radar
STANAG Standardisation Agreement
STCA Short-Term Conflict Alert
SUR Surveillance
SWIM System-Wide Information Management
TACAN (UHF) Tactical Air Navigation Aid
TCAS Traffic Collision Avoidance System
TCP/IP Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol
TDMA Time Division Multiple Access
TGL Temporary Guidance Leaflet
TIS-B Traffic Information System - Broadcast
TMA Terminal Manoeuvring Area
UAT Universal Asynchronous Transceiver
UHF Ultra High Frequency
VCS Voice Communication System
VDL VHF Data Link
VFR Visual Flight Rules
VHF Very High Frequency
VOLMET Meteorological Information for Aircraft in Flight
VOR VHF Omnidirectional Radio Range
VORTAC VOR associated with TACAN for civil usage
WAN Wide-Area Network
WRC World Radiocommunication Conference

41
GLOSSARY
11.2 Definitions
Air Defence (AD)
All measures designed to nullify or reduce the effectiveness of hostile air action.
Air Surveillance
The systematic observation of airspace by electronic, visual or other means with the primary purpose of identifying and deter-
mining the movements of aircraft and missiles.
Area Navigation (RNAV)

This is a method which permits aircraft navigation along any desired flight path within the coverage of the associated naviga-
tion aids or within the limits of the capability of self-contained aids, or a combination of these methods.
RNAV equipment is considered to be any equipment which operates by automatically determining aircraft position from one
or a combination of sensors with the means to establish and follow a desired path.
Automatic Dependent Surveillance - Broadcast (ADS-B)

Automatic Dependent Surveillance - Broadcast (ADS-B) is a surveillance technique which allows the transmission of aircraft-
derived parameters, such as position and identification, via a broadcast-mode data link for use by any air and/or ground users.
Each ADS-B emitter periodically broadcasts its position and other data provided by the on-board aircraft avionics systems. Any
user, either airborne or ground-based, within range of the emitter may choose to receive and process the information.
B-RNAV
B-RNAV is defined as RNAV which meets a track-keeping accuracy equal to or better than +/- 5 NM for 95% of the flight time
(RNP-5).This value includes signal source error, airborne receiver error, display system error, and flight technical error.This nav-
igation performance assumes that the necessary coverage provided by satellite or ground-based navigation aids is available for
the intended route to be flown.
Command and Control System

An assembly of equipment, methods, procedures and, if necessary, personnel, enabling commanders and their staffs to exercise
command and control.
Communication and Information Systems (CIS)

Collective term for communication systems and information systems.
Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS)

Pertaining to a commercially marketed product which is readily available for procurement.
Communication System
An assembly of equipment, methods, procedures and, if necessary, personnel, organised to accomplish information transfer func-
tions. A communication system provides communication between its users and may embrace transmission systems, switching
systems and user systems.
Distance-Measuring Equipment (DME)

Equipment (airborne and ground) used to measure, in nautical miles, the slant range distance of an aircraft from the DME nav-
igational aid. DME is usually frequency-paired with other navigational aids such as a VOR or localiser.

42
GLOSSARY
Elementary Surveillance (ELS)
Elementary Surveillance includes basic surveillance and also delivers the following to the surveillance user including humans and
systems that may utilise Controller or System Access Parameters (CAP/SAP):
➭ the aircraft identity - the Mode A call sign and 24-bit address, flight identity or tail registration;
➭ the aircraft pressure altitude in units of 100 ft or 25 ft, if the aircraft is appropriately equipped.
Mode S Elementary Surveillance functionality shall constitute the following transponder parameters and data formats for
Ground Initiated Comm.-B (GICB) protocols as defined in ICAO Annex 10 volume III (Amendment 77 or later), Appendix 1:
➭ 24 bit aircraft address,
➭ SSR Mode 3/A
➭ Altitude reporting in 25ft increments (or at least 100 ft increments - subject to airframe capability, ICAO Annex
10,Vol IV 2.1.3)
➭ Flight Status (airborne/on the ground) (ICAO Annex 10,Vol IV 23.1.2.8.6.7)
➭ Data Link Capability Report (BDS 10 hex)
➭ Common Usage GICB Capability Report (BDS 17 hex)
➭ Aircraft identification (BDS 20 hex)
➭ ACAS Active Resolution Advisory (BDS 30 hex) if ACAS equipped
➭ The aircraft operator has to ensure that the aircraft reports a unique 24 bit aircraft address as assigned by the
appropriate State Authorities and as managed by the appropriate military domain (if applicable)
Enhanced Surveillance (EHS)

Enhanced Surveillance includes elementary surveillance and also delivers to the surveillance user a set of air-derived data
(ADD) in order to provide additional data to ground-based ATM systems and safety nets.
When implemented using Mode S SSR, the following aircraft parameters are automatically extracted from the aircraft:
BDS Register Basic DAP Set Alternative DAP Set

(if Track Angle Rate is available) (if Track Angle Rate is not available)
BDS 4,0 Selected Altitude Selected Altitude

BDS 5,0 Roll Angle Roll Angle
Track Angle Rate
True Track Angle True Track Angle
Ground Speed Ground Speed
BDS 6,0 Magnetic Heading Magnetic Heading
Indicated Airspeed (IAS) / Mach no. Indicated Airspeed (IAS) / Mach no. (Note: IAS
(Note: IAS and Mach no. are considered and Mach no. are considered as 1 DAP (even if
as 1 DAP (even if technically they are 2 technically they are 2 separate ARINC labels).
separate ARINC labels). If the aircraft can If the aircraft can provide both, it must do so).
provide both, it must do so).
Vertical Rate (Barometric rate of climb/ Vertical Rate (Barometric rate of climb/descend or
descend or baro-inertial) baro-inertial)
True Airspeed (provided if Track Angle Rate is not
available)
The two columns reflect which DAPs are to be provided if Track Angle Rate is or is not available.

43
GLOSSARY
Global Positioning System (GPS)
GPS is a US space-based positioning, velocity and time system composed of space, control and user elements.The space ele-
ment is nominally composed of 24 satellites in six orbital planes. The control element consists of five monitor stations, three
ground antennae and a master control station.The user element consists of antennae and receiver processors providing posi-
tioning, velocity, and precise timing to the user.
Identification, Friend or Foe (IFF)

A system using electromagnetic transmissions to which equipment carried by friendly forces automatically responds by, for
example, emitting pulses, thereby distinguishing themselves from enemy forces.
Instrument Landing System (ILS)

A precision instrument approach and landing system which normally consists of the following electronic components:VHF (very
high-frequency) localiser and glide path equipment; an associated monitor system; remote-control and indicator equipment.
Information System
An assembly of equipment, methods, procedures and, if necessary, personnel, organised to accomplish information processing
functions.
Interoperability
The ability of systems to provide information and services to and accept information and services from other systems and to
use the information and services so exchanged.
It is also defined as the condition achieved among communications-electronics systems or items of communications-
electronics equipment when information or services can be exchanged directly and satisfactorily between them and/or their
users.
Microwave Landing System (MLS)

MLS is a precision approach and landing guidance system which provides position information and various ground to air data.
Multilateration
Multilateration is a surveillance technique where aircraft replies from other SSR or SSR Mode S interrogations or spontaneous
squitter from Mode S transponders are passively received by three or more ground receiver stations. Using time-of-arrival
techniques, the position and altitude of the target can be determined.
In some multilateration systems at airports, active Mode S selective interrogations are used to extract aircraft identity, Mode A
or other data from the aircraft.
NATO Consultation, Command and Control Systems

Communication and information systems, sensor systems and facilities which enable NATO Authorities and Commands to carry
out consultation, command and control.
NATO Standardisation Agreement (STANAG)

The record of an agreement among some or all the member nations to adopt similar military equipment, ammunition, supplies,
stores and operational, logistic and administrative procedures. National acceptance of a NATO publication issued by the Military
Agency for Standardisation may be recorded as a Standardisation Agreement. Also known as "STANAG".
Primary Surveillance Radar (PSR)

Primary radar operates by radiating high levels of electromagnetic energy and detecting the presence and characteristics of
echoes returned from reflected objects.
Target detection is based entirely on the receipt of reflected energy. It does not depend on any energy radiated from the tar-
get itself, i.e. no carriage of airborne equipment is required.
Required Navigation Performance (RNP)

This is a statement of the navigation performance necessary for operation within a defined airspace.
Required Navigation Performance Type (RNP Type)

RNP types are established according to navigational performance accuracy in the horizontal plane, that is, lateral and longitudi-
nal position fixing.The type is identified as an accuracy value expressed in nautical miles (e.g. RNP-5).

44
GLOSSARY
Secondary Surveillance Radar (SSR)
Secondary surveillance radar (SSR) operates by transmitting coded interrogations in order to receive coded information from
all SSR transponder-equipped aircraft, providing a two-way "data link" on separate interrogation (1030 MHz) and reply (1090
MHz) frequencies.
Replies contain positive identification as requested by the interrogation: either one of 4096 codes (Mode A) or aircraft pres-
sure altitude reports (Mode C).The cooperative concept ensures stable received signal strength and considerably lower trans-
mitted power levels than primary radar.
SSR Mode S
SSR Mode S is a development of SSR. It uses the same interrogation and reply frequencies as SSR but the selective interroga-
tions contain a unique 24-bit address. This ensures that transmissions can be decoded only by the one aircraft equipped with
the Mode S transponder corresponding to that 24-bit address.
A Mode S station also transmits conventional SSR formats in order to detect SSR-only aircraft (Mode A/C) and is thus down-
wards compatible with SSR Mode A/C.
The SSR Mode S transponder is also a fundamental part of the ACAS airborne installation and ADS-B when using the SSR
1090 MHz transmission.
Surveillance
Surveillance is defined as the technique for the timely detection of targets, the determination of their position (and, if required,
the acquisition of supplementary information relating to targets) and the timely delivery of this information to users in support
of the safe control and separation of targets within a defined area of interest.
Tactical Air Navigation (TACAN)

Tactical Air Navigation (TACAN) is a NATO military radio navigation system which provides a pilot with a bearing and distance
to a beacon on the ground, a ship, or specially equipped aircraft. TACAN is the primary tactical air navigation system for the
military services ashore and afloat.TACAN is often collocated with civil VOR stations (VORTAC facilities).
Traffic Information Service - Broadcast (TIS-B)

TIS-B allows an air traffic situation picture to be transmitted to an aircraft from the ground. It is a Traffic Information Service.
Very High Frequency Omnidirectional Radio Range (VOR)

A very high frequency radio navigational aid which provides suitably equipped aircraft with a continuous indication of bearing
to and from the VOR station.
Very High Frequency Omnidirectional Radio Range/Tactical Air Navigation (VORTAC)

A navigational facility consisting of two components, VOR and TACAN, which provide three services: VOR azimuth, TACAN
azimuth, and TACAN slant range.

45
12. REFERENCED AND RELATED

DOCUMENTS
[1] EUROCONTROL ATM Strategy for 2000+,Volumes 1 and 2, 2003 edition
[2] Operational Concept Document,Volume 1, Edition 2.1 - 12JAN04
[3] EATMP Communications Strategy Volume 1, Edition 4.2 - 28SEP05 and Volume 2, Edition 5.4 - 28SEP05
[4] Surveillance Strategy for ECAC, Edition 2.0 - 18NOV05
[5] Surveillance Development Roadmap, Edition 1.1 - MAR02 (under revision)
[6] Target Surveillance Functional Architecture, Edition 1.0 - NOV03
[7] Mode S Programme Management Plan, Edition 1.2 - 13MAR03
[8] Mode S Concept of Operations CONOPS, 1996
[9] Automatic Dependent Surveillance Concept, Edition 1.7 - 28SEP01
[10] 8.33 User Guide, Edition 5.1 - 21JAN02
[11] 8.33 Implementation Plan for above FL195, Draft Edition0.5 - AUG04
[12] ATC Data Link Manual for Link 2000+ Services,Version 2.0 - JUL04
[13] ECAC Navigation Strategy and Implementation Plan, Draft Edition 2.0 - 09DEC04
[14] Overall CNS/ATM Target Architecture Management Overview, Edition 3.0 - 3MAY02
[15] Interoperability Requirements Document (IRD) Air Traffic Flow Management and Flight Plan Management to Military
ATS Providers, Draft Edition 0.02, 9JAN03
[16] Feasibility Study for Civil Aviation Data Link for ADS-B Based on MIDS/Link 16, Edition 1.0 - 15AUG03
[17] NATO AC/322(SC/1-WG/2)N/486, Common Fitting Standards for Air Communications, Navigation, Identification
and Landing Systems - 14JAN2003
[18] NATO EAPC(AC/322-SC/2)N(2003)029, NATO Policy for C3 Systems Interoperability - 4DEC03
[19] NATO EAPC(AC/322-SC/2)N(2003)027, NATO C3 System Architecture Framework - 24NOV03
[20] NATO EAPC(NATMC-CNS)N(2005)0004, NATO Strategic Plan for Joint Air Navigation and Landing Systems -
05AUG05
[21] EUROCONTROL-NATO Memorandum of Cooperation, 25MAR03
[22] ICAO Doc 7030 Part 1 - Rules of the Air, ATS and SAR
[23] European Aeronautical Spectrum Strategy for the Years 2005-2025, draft edition, 10SEP04
[24] Common Action Plan 17 on Future Communication Systems included in the Revised Memorandum of Cooperation
(MOC) between the FAA and EUROCONTROL, 01OCT04
[25] ICAO Document 9613 “Manual on Required Navigation Performance” (RNP MAN), 1994
[26] EUROCONTROL Standard Document for Area Navigation Equipment - Operational Requirements and Functional
Requirements, Edition 2.2 - December 1998
[27] RTCA DO-236A /EUROCAE ED75 Minimum Aviation System Performance Standards for Required Navigation
Performance for Area Navigation, 1998
[28] NATO AC/92-N(2004)0010, Updated NATO Military Position on Mode S, 21OCT04
[29] Agency ATM Security Policy Guidance, approved by EUROCONTROL PC
[30] Mode S Harmonisation of the Transition Arrangements for State aircraft - Process and Procedures for the Managing
of the Mode S Compliance Status and the Exemptions Granted to State Aircraft, Ed. 1.0 dd, 14JAN05

46
ANNEX A
List of other Avionics Requirements not extensively discussed in the main body of this interoperability roadmap. (See also the
EUROCONTROL Avionics Information web page).
Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS)
ACAS II is intended to improve air safety by acting as a "last-resort" method of preventing mid-air collisions or near colli-
sions between aircraft.
By utilising secondary surveillance radar (SSR) technology, ACAS equipment operates independently of ground-based aids
and ATC. Aircraft equipped with ACAS have the ability to monitor other aircraft in the vicinity and assess the risk of colli-
sion by interrogating airborne transponders. Non-transponding aircraft are not detected.
Designation Requirement for ECAC Airspace Applicability to State Aircraft

ACAS II TCAS II, version 7 mandated from ACAS mandate is only applicable for civil aircraft.Voluntary
01Jan 2000 and 01 Jan 2005 for civil installation programme on military transport-type aircraft
aircraft depending on its MTOM and by 1 January 2005. In Germany the 01JAN 2005 mandate
passenger seats. includes “military transport aircraft” but German authorities
put in place transitional arrangements and an exemption
process.
Reduced Vertical Separation Minima (RVSM)
RVSM provides continuous 1000-ft vertical separation and an additional six flight levels between FL 290 and FL 410 in the
upper airspace of the 41 States involved in the Programme.
The main provision for any reduction in vertical separation is that aircraft flying in this area are to be equipped with height-
keeping equipment complying with ICAO Minimum Aircraft Systems Performance Specification (altimetry) (MASPS).
MASPS ensure height-keeping accuracy to a standard compatible with the agreed safety requirements.This includes at least
two independent altimeters on board the aircraft, which must always be within a certain tolerance of each other.
Many aircraft operating as OAT cannot meet the MASPS requirement for height-keeping performance and therefore
require 2000-ft minimum vertical separation from all other aircraft. Based on the results of real-time RVSM simulations, the
operations of OAT traffic crossing routes within RVSM airspace should not be hindered to any significant degree. This
requires adequate coordination between military and civil ATC units.

RVSM Mandated in EUR RVSM Airspace from “State aircraft benefit from RVSM exemption. Military
FL290 to FL410. ICAO MASPS. aircraft operating as GAT which are non MASPS RVSM
compliant are allowed in RVSM airspace but are subject to
2000ft vertical separation from all other aircraft”.
Of course, MASPS RVSM-compliant military aircraft are
subject to 1000-ft vertical separation.
FM immunity
For safety reasons,VOR and ILS receivers and other VHF avionics in the aircraft are now required to be protected against
potential interference from VHF broadcast transmissions. This entails the use of FM-immune VHF equipment by modifica-
tion of existing equipment or re-equipage (e.g. filters or MMR). Exemptions for State aircraft may still be negotiated on a
bilateral basis but many national aeronautical publications are constraining landing authorisations on the carriage of FM-
immune avionics.

VHF Com All VHF Com equipment. Exemptions for State aircraft may still be negotiated
Immunity from on a bilateral basis.
FM radio broadcasts Consult national AIPs.

47
ANNEX A
Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning System / Terrain Awareness Warning System
The EGPWS provides a real-time situational awareness of surrounding terrain and obstacles in relation to the aircraft's alti-
tude and flight path.The system is designed to visually and aurally alert the flight crew of potential trouble ahead.
EGPWS includes a built-in terrain and obstacle database designed to provide situational awareness and help avoid CFIT
accidents.The terrain and obstacle information can be displayed in the cockpit on a variety of compatible displays (EFIS or
Weather Radar) so that a pilot can immediately determine if the surrounding terrain or obstacles are above or below the
aircraft's altitude and pose a potential threat.

EGPWS/TAWS ICAO world wide mandate. ICAO Applicability to State aircraft not defined.This is not an
Annex 6 part 1. ATM/CNS Requirement as stated in ICAO Annex 6
Part 1. Paras 6.15.5 to 6.15.7
Flight Data Monitoring
This requirement is Awaiting JAA adoption planned for 2005. the proposal is for aircraft > 27,000kg to be equipped with
a suitable electronic flight data recorder or quick access recorder where flight data can be regularly replayed for purposes
of crew monitoring.

Flight Data Planned for 2005. Proposed equipage for Not defined
Monitoring aircraft>27,000 kg with electronic flight data
recorder.
Emergency Locator
This is an ICAO worldwide aircraft requirement that foresees that all aircraft with a certificate of airworthiness (CA) after
1/1/2002 shall be equipped with an automatic ELT capable of transmitting on 121.5 MHz and 406MHz. Aeroplanes with a
CA before 1/1/2002 must have any type of ELT capable of transmitting on 121.5MHz and 406MHz.

Emergency Mandated 1/1/2002. ICAO SARPS Annex 6 Not defined
Locator / ELT Part 1, para 6.17 See also JAR.OPS 1.820

48
ANNEX B
List of ECIP objectives (detailed description, scope, status, applicability area and implementation dates can be found at
www.eurocontrol.int/ecip/protected/index.html)
Communications
Objective Description
COM01 Implement 8.33 kHz Frequency Spacing

COM02 Expansion of the use of 8.33 kHz VHF frequency channels
COM03 Implement 8.33 kHz channel spacing above FL 195
COM04 Migrate flight data exchange from X.25 to TCP/IP
COM05 Migrate from AFTN/CIDIN to AMHS for international communications
COM06 Migrate to ATS-Qsig digital signalling for ground telephone applications
COM07 Improve the management and optimise the operational use of aeronautical frequency assignments
in allocated radio bands
COM09 Migrate ground international or regional X.25 data networks or services to the Internet Protocol (IP)
Navigation
NAV03 Implementation of Precision Area Navigation RNAV (P-RNAV) as an interim step towards
Required Navigational Performance Area Navigation (RNP RNAV)
NAV05 Implementation of Required Navigation Performance Area Navigation (RNP-RNAV)
NAV06 Rationalisation of navigation infrastructure
NAV07 Enable implementation of RNAV approach procedures on the basis of DME/DME and/or basic GNSS, and
RNAV approach procedures with Barometric Vertical Guidance (ICAO APV/Baro VNAV)
NAV08 Enable implementation of approach procedures with vertical guidance using SBAS (ICAO APV I&II)
NAV09 Enable GBAS Cat.1-based precision approach service as a first step towards a system providing Category
II and III capability
Surveillance
SUR01 Implement dual secondary surveillance radar (SSR) coverage

SUR02 Implement Mode S Elementary Surveillance
SUR03 Implement radar data processing and distribution systems
SUR04 Implement Mode S Enhanced Surveillance
SUR05 Implement ground-based surveillance in continental airspace and airports via Automatic Dependent
Surveillance Broadcast (ADS-B)
SUR06 Implement Automatic Dependent Surveillance Contract (ADS- C) to provide and/or improve surveillance
in low air traffic density/non-continental airspace
Spectrum
SPC01 Organise & implement the management of the aviation radio spectrum at European level
SPC02 Implement co-ordinated spectrum usage forecast and monitoring

© European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation (EUROCONTROL) - March 2006
This document is published by EUROCONTROL in the interests of exchange of information.

It may be copied in whole or in part, providing that the copyright notice and disclaimer is included.
This information contained in this document may not be modified without prior written permission from
EUROCONTROL.
EUROCONTROL makes no warranty, either implied or express, for the information contained in this docu-
ment, neither does it assume any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of
this information.
EUROCONTROL Headquarters
96 Rue de la Fusée
B-1130 Brussels
tel: +32 2 729 90 11
fax: +32 2 729 90 44
Web: http//www.eurocontrol.int

CM CNS RM 1 - 0

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

CM CNS RM 1 - 0

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Civil-Military CNS/ATM

Civil-Military CNS/ATM Interoperability Roadmap

Civil-Military CNS/ATM Interoperability Roadmap

Document Identifier EDITION: 1.0

Contact Person(s): Tel: UNIT:

STATUS, AUDIENCE AND ACCESSIBILITY

Working Draft ❏ General Public ❏ Intranet ❏

Civil-Military CNS/ATM Interoperability Roadmap

Tel: +32 (0)2 729 51 51

Open on 08:00 - 15:00 UTC from Monday to Thursday, including

AUTHORITY NAME AND SIGNATURE DATE

Chairman CNS FGr Lieutenant Colonel Jorge A. Pereira

Chairman MIL Team Colonel (ret’d) Luc Vervoort

Civil-Military CNS/ATM Interoperability Roadmap

Civil-Military CNS/ATM Interoperability Roadmap

8 Certification issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32

9 Spectrum issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33

10 Other Aeronautical Systems Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36

12 Referenced and related documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45

Civil-Military CNS/ATM Interoperability Roadmap

Civil-Military CNS/ATM Interoperability Roadmap

1.2 About this document

Civil-Military CNS/ATM Interoperability Roadmap

Luxembourg Czech Ukraine

1.3 Responsible body

Civil-Military CNS/ATM Interoperability Roadmap

Civil-Military CNS/ATM Interoperability Roadmap

➭ focuses on maintaining or improving the current level of flight safety;

➭ addresses the improvement of flexibility, mission effectiveness and global interoperability;

Civil-Military CNS/ATM Interoperability Roadmap

4 OVERALL CNS ISSUES

4.2 ATM Security issues

Civil-Military CNS/ATM Interoperability Roadmap

OVERALL CNS ISSUES

4.3 Rationalisation of CNS infrastructures

4.4 Applicability to Operational Air Traffic (OAT)

Civil-Military CNS/ATM Interoperability Roadmap

5.2 Military communications

➭ administrative communications using multiple bearers.

Civil-Military CNS/ATM Interoperability Roadmap

5.3 The EUROCONTROL Communications Strategy

Civil-Military CNS/ATM Interoperability Roadmap

5.4.2 Air/Ground communications interoperability

5.4.3 Air/Ground Voice

5.4.4 Expansion of 8.33 kHz Channel Spacing and State Aircraft

Civil-Military CNS/ATM Interoperability Roadmap

5.4.5 Air/Ground Data

Civil-Military CNS/ATM Interoperability Roadmap

5.4.6 Long-term communications technology convergence

Civil-Military CNS/ATM Interoperability Roadmap

5.5 Recommended actions

5.5.2 Ground/ground communications

5.5.3 Air/ground communications

5.5.4 Long-term communications technology convergence

Civil-Military CNS/ATM Interoperability Roadmap

Communications Interoperability Roadmap

Years 2005 2010 2015 2020 Observations

■ Military to subscribe to PENS services

UHF 25 kHz ■ ANSPs' capability to accommodate

system to be screened ■ Decision taken by 2006 at the latest

Civil-Military CNS/ATM Interoperability Roadmap

6.2 Military requirements for aeronautical radio navigation

airworthiness certification requirements;

the accuracy, availability, integrity and reliability of navigation aids/systems;

requirements for the certification of navigation aids/systems;

certification procedures and documentation;

the accuracy, integrity, reliability of navigation systems;

aircraft navigation equipment;

certification requirements, procedures and documentation;

State aircraft are assumed, as a minimum, to be capable of navigating utilising conventional