EUROCONTROL Navigation Domain The Data Collection Network EGNOS

EUROCONTROL Navigation Domain The Data Collection Network: EGNOS revealed GNSS 2004 – Rotterdam, The Netherlands Santiago Soley, PILDO Labs S. L. EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

Summary Q EUROCONTROL: GNSS-1 Operational Validation Q The Data Collection Network Q A Methodology to assess EGNOS performance • First Glance • Anomaly Investigation • Towards the Final Results Q Conclusions and Future Work EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

EUROCONTROL The European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation 32 Member States 31 Member States EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

GNSS-1 Operational Validation Q EUROCONTROL will coordinate the GNSS-1 Operational Validation: • To support the Member States in achieving the approval for the provision of EGNOS services throughout ECAC (European Civil Aviation Conference) Q Two distinct areas of work: • Technical Validation of the performance - SARPS requirements – RNP values - MOPS DO 229 C compliant receiver • Definition of operational rules and procedures for aircraft to use the system for a particular application (APV implementation) EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

The Data Collection Network: Objectives Q Collect ESTB/EGNOS Data and Evaluate them from different sites in Europe Q Group of experts to support: • the development of the tools need in the future EGNOS Operational Validation - PEGASUS • definition of data collection and processing procedures Q Baseline for the future static campaign in the GOV Plan – extended with the Air Navigation Service Providers participation EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

The Network Tromsö ESTB reference station (RIMS) Höfn EURIDIS reference station Hönefoss ESTB processing facilities (CPF, MCC) IOR PRN 131 Rotterdam NLES Scilly The Data Collection Network GOV ANSP Toulouse Lisboa Barcelona Fucino Malaga Kourou Canaries Ankara Palma Matera Hartebeesthoek EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

The Methodology Actual performance SARPS Thresholds Integrity Accuracy Availability Continuity Data sample filtering (plausibility rules/flag) • event counting • visualisation • position domain A Sy nom st a em ly an inve al st ys ig is ati o n samples parameters System behaviour • file watch • MT • ionosphere • ranges • clock • multipath • etc. Processed data Ex Sim trapo ula latio n n • Integrity (range) • RNP availability • Continuity Confidence EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

A First Glance Q Proposed algorithms ACCURACY Q Check against RNP parameters AVAILABILITY Q single site/day CONTINUITY INTEGRITY Q test fail or pass EGNOS post-SIS 1 EEC, April 23 rd, 2004 EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

Summary of results – Vertical Position Error 95% EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

Summary of results – APV-II Availability (AL 20 m) EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

Anomaly Investigation Q What to do if some anomalies appear that makes some of the test fail? Q Just a first check on the obtained performance is not enough to declare the system not compliant with the requirements • detailed analysis on what caused a test fail Q Different methods and techniques used by the Network EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

Example 1: Jump on the VPE Jump on the position error periodically experienced Delft, December 26 th, 2002 EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

Example 1: Jump on the VPE Multipath Mc combination Delft, December 26 th, 2002 EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

Example 2: Integrity Failures Integrity failures: HPE>HPL Barcelona, February 6 th, 2003 EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

Example 2: Integrity Failures MT 02/03 anomalies Psedorange correction oscillations broadcast in MT 02 and MT 03 UDREI<12 IODF<3 Barcelona, February 6 th, 2003 EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

Example 3: Integrity Failures MT 26 anomalies 60 MI in about 500 epochs Ionospheric corrections for all visible satellites PRN 17 in red Barcelona, September 12 th, 2002 EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

Example 4: Integrity Failures UPC 1: Vertical Component 8 consecutive MI Prefit- residuals Barcelona, May 22 th, 2003 EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

Example 4: Integrity Failures satellite clock jump Fast Corrections: UDREI=14 PRN 29 NO Alarm Conditions (IODF <3 & UDREI<15) 9 s PRN 29 Prefit- residuals Sudden jump in C 1 code Pseudorange for PRN 29. The ESTB declares the sat. as NOT MONITORED (UDREI=14) 9 sec. after. Barcelona, May 22 th, 2003 EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

Example 5: Integrity Failures VPE/VPL Large number of MI 20: 40 19: 17 Pref-Res PRN 11 PRN 16 Prefit- residuals PRN 02 Barcelona, November 20 th, 2003 EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

Example 5: Integrity Failures PRN 16: C 1 -Rho (shifted) STEC (m L 1) PRN 16: L 1 -L 2 (shifted) PRN 16: P 2 -P 1 (shifted) PRN 16: STEC +/- UIRE (ESTB) 19: 17 Barcelona, November 20 th, 2003 20: 40 EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

Example 5: Integrity Failures October 29 -31 th Ionospheric storm 18: 00 November 20 -21 th Extreme Very High Medium LOW 20: 00 Kp index from Oct. 17 th up to Dec. 1 st 2003 22: 00 EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

Towards the final results Q To validate SARPS requirements in a reasonable period of time just the data collected from the network would not be enough • simulations or other methods – get up to the required level of confidence from the measurements Q Impossible to do it for all locations under all conditions • extrapolation of the local results from the network sites • Global Assessment EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

The Global Monitoring System GPS networks LINUX Automatic data gathering INTERNET 24 h GPS and GEO binary data Slog Receiver 24 h RINEX files Automatic data collecting WEB server BRUS PEGASUS Automatic daily processing Automatic results presentation e-mail EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

The Global Monitoring System Q Cross-check with simulations Q Network results extrapolation Q Global Assessment HPE 95% & Integrity Events HPL 99% & satellites used EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

Conclusions Q Summary of the activities from the Data Collection Network – Eurocontrol • gain knowledge on how the data need to be collected, processed analysed – EGNOS Operational Validation Q Methodology (3 axis) • Actual performance- First glance report • System Behaviour - Anomaly investigation • Confidence, Extrapolation – Global Monitoring System Q Dynamic trials EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

Future Work Q Improving the network layout and the automation of procedures • continuous data logging • automated results data sharing - ftp Q Potential data exploitation and validation of the Global Monitoring System results • harmonization with the network sites ones Q Data campaigns with the first EGNOS SIS • reuse of all the ESTB lessons learned • expected that the encountered anomalies rarely happen • EGNOS SIS-1 confirms that EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

Questions? EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre