Transcript IATA DLFTF POST 4/1

Conditions for Mandating
Data Link Equipage
Steve Zerkowitz - IATA
1
What is the IATA Data Link Facilitation Task Force?
 Created by the NAT/NAM and EUR RCG to address airline data link
implementation related issues and facilitate airline implementation
plans
 Chaired by KLM, airline members from both the US and Europe
 Meetings attended also by communications service providers,
ATS providers, Airbus and also ATM/avionics industry
representatives
 On the most important issues, the IATA DLFTF formalizes its
position in Position Statements called POSTs
 IATA DLFTF POST 4/1 addresses the conditions for mandating
data link equipage
 The IATA DLFTF is proposing to develop this POST into IATA
policy in due course
2
Voluntary or mandated equipage?
 The IATA DLFTF POST does not stipulate that data link
equipage MUST be mandated
 It only sets out the conditions to be observed if mandating
is found to be required
 It is the considered opinion of the IATA DLFTF that, in some
regions, purely voluntary equipage will not result in a
sufficiently high number of equipped aircraft by the time it
is expected that ATS data links will become essential if
traffic demand is to be met
 The DLFTF is proposing a combination of mandate and
incentives, set in the framework of well defined conditions,
requiring commitment from both airlines and providers
(ATS and Communications)
3
Advantages of a mandated scenario-1
 A known rate of equipage can be achieved at a pre-planned
date
 A well-chosen date enables good planning and orderly
retrofit
 Avionics manufacturers and airframers have something
concrete to work to, resulting in better forward fit options
 Equipment manufacturing can be adjusted to meet demand
on a timely basis
 ATM improvements dependant on, or connected to, data
link capability can be planned with concrete implementation
dates
 Planning for ground system upgrades can be synchronized
to a known capability date
4
Advantages of a mandated scenario-2
 The mandate can be made contingent upon commitments
from service providers as well as airspace users
 A system of rewards can be devised to benefit those who
equip in advance of the mandate, thereby accelerating the
process even further
5
What if there is no mandate?
 Some airlines will equip early, others may hold off
indefinitely
 The process may slow down or stall completely
 Nobody is really committed
 ATS providers may wait for the airlines and vice versa
 Nobody really benefits until very late in the process, if at all
 Planning is very difficult with no real milestones to work to
6
Area of applicability
 The DLFTF did not limit the area of applicability to any
particular region
 May be applied wherever conditions require (need for data
link to increase capacity, uncertainty about achieving
critical volume, etc.)
 Waivers in respect of aircraft the retrofit of which is not
economical, without having an adverse impact on the
totality of the benefits.
 Europe will probably require a mandate
7
Current Status
 POST 4/1 approved by the IATA DLFTF
 Approved by the IATA European Regional Co-ordination
Group
 Approved by the IATA NAT/NAM Regional Co-ordination
Group
 Approved by the IATA/AEA Joint User Requirements Group
 Its aims and protocols supported also by the ATA Flight
Systems Integration Committee
 Submitted to the IATA Operations Commitee for adoption
as policy
8
DLFTF Position Statement (POST4/1)
"With due regard to the fact that voluntary equipage
of aircraft with ATS data link capability is not
expected to result in a sufficiently high ratio of
equipped aircraft for real benefits to accrue at an
early stage and mindful of the essential enabling
role ATS data link will play in the quest for
additional ATM capacity in the timeframe 2005
and beyond, the IATA DLFTF considers that:
9
- Aircraft ATS data link capability may be
mandated in well defined areas/airspace
volumes selected on the basis of an identified
need for additional ATM capacity, covering
designated aircraft operations in that airspace,
on condition that:

An appropriate independent cost/benefit
analysis has been performed, showing a
positive benefit to cost ratio for the whole ATM
system; and
10
 The minimum airborne & ground datalink capability is specified and agreed
amongst all stakeholders prior to publication
of the mandate; and
 The capability is based on ATN and
functionality defined in ICAO ATN SARPS or
subset(s) thereof; and
 ATN ground and airborne systems
within the jurisdiction of the mandate are
globally inter-operable; and
11
• ATS systems serving the areas/airspace
volumes where aircraft data link capability is to
be mandated are enabled for data link use
progressively, commencing not later than the
publication of the mandate and achieving full
capability and coverage not later than the date
of the mandate; and
• A set of incentives for early aircraft ATS data
link equipage (e.g. in the form of Service Level
Agreements between aircraft operators and air
traffic service providers, resulting in lower user
charges for equipped aircraft) are implemented
effective not later than the date of publication of
the mandate; and
12
• The time-scale from publication to the effective
date of the mandate and associated
certification material is not less than 5 years;
and
• Appropriate arrangements are made for those
aircraft, which cannot be economically
equipped, ensuring however, that such
arrangements do not adversely affect equipped
aircraft (e.g. unequipped aircraft may be
accommodated outside of the airspace
volumes defined in the mandate).
13
Furthermore:
- The date shall be chosen to coincide with the
earliest time ATS data link capability may be
considered as essential for supporting the
proposed ATM improvements, but with due
regard to the time needed by airspace users
to meet the mandate in an orderly fashion.
14
- The mandate shall be published after having
been processed via the normal route of
generating new requirements, including those
for certification, (e.g. ENPRM in the future in
Europe) in a clear and unambiguous manner via
an AIS instrument appropriate to the State(s)
party to the mandate, and which carries the
force of law. While an AIC may be published as
the instrument of pre-notification, it is not
considered as appropriate for
publishingcompulsory requirements.”
15
Questions please…
16