# Presentation: 875063

## MONITORING GOALS

- Presentation 17

**MONITORING GOALS**

**Dale Livingston**
**FAA Technical Center**
**Atlantic City, New Jersey**

## SAFETY GOALS

- Basis for Safety Goals - Adherence to Manual on Implementation of a 300 m (1,000 ft) Vertical Separation Minimum Between FL 290 and FL 410 Inclusive (Doc 9574, Second Ed.)
- Doc 9574 Global System Performance Specification based on application of collision risk methodology
- ICAO’s Review of the General Concept of Separation Panel (RCGSP) intended Doc 9574 provide for safe RVSM implementation in the future

## TWO ASPECTS OF SAFETY GOALS

**Need to ensure that individual operators and aircraft meet applicable safety goals**
**Need to ensure that North American airspace system as a whole meets applicable safety goal - the Target Level of Safety (TLS)**
**Monitoring of aircraft height-keeping performance assists in confirming that both aspects of safety goals are satisfied**

## MONITORING PERFORMANCE-THE MAJOR PROBLEM 

*FL 350  Geometric Height*

*FL 350  = Constant Pressure Altitude*

**MONITORING PERFORMANCE-****THE MAJOR PROBLEM **

## HEIGHT-KEEPING PERFORMANCE ERRORS

*FL 350  Geometric Height*

**HEIGHT-KEEPING PERFORMANCE ERRORS**

*Aircraft geometric height*

*            **Total Vertical Error  (TVE)*
*            **=  Altimetry System Error +*
*           **Assigned Altitude Deviation    *
*            **= ASE +AAD *

## Monitoring Requirements/Procedures 

**See RVSM Documentation Webpage**
**Monitoring Requirements/Procedures section**
**See “Instructions for Using Minimum Monitoring Charts and Procedures from Different Regions”**
**See “Monitoring Procedures for US Operators”**
**See “North American RVSM Minimum Monitoring Requirements” and requirements for other regions**
**ICAO group working to harmonize requirements**

## MONITORING AND THE STATE  APPROVAL PROCESS

**GPS-based Monitoring System (GMS), improved with enhanced GPS Monitoring Unit, plays a prominent role in supporting operator/aircraft satisfaction of monitoring requirements associated with RVSM approval process**
**Focus on monitoring requirements for RVSM approval**

## GPS Monitoring Unit (GMU)

## Typical GMU Installation

## GPS-Based Monitoring SystemData Flow

**Differential Data**

**Via Internet/Direct**

**Data Transmitted Post-Flight**

**Post-flight Processing Station**

**Vertical Error Processing**
**FAA Technical Center**

**Airborne GPS-based Monitoring Unit (GMU)**

**Remote Reference Station**

**FAA Technical Center Database**

- ASE Results

**Database (Monitoring Results)**

**Mode C Data**

**Meteorological Data (Height of flight level)**

- Flight Information Form (FIF)

- Flight Information Form (FIF)

## GMS Vertical Error Calculation Process

- Determine Flight Level (FL) Height

- Determine Aircraft Geometric Height

- Compare Cleared FL to Actual Altitude

- GMU

- GPS Reference Station

- Meteorological Data

- Cleared FL (FIF)

- Mode C Data

- Cleared FL (FIF)

- TVE (Total Vertical Error)

- ASE (Altimetry System Error)

- AAD (Assigned Altitude Deviation)

## Height Monitoring Unit (HMU)

- Ground-based system capable of monitoring height-keeping performance of an aircraft within (roughly) 40-nm of ground stations and producing estimate of ASE in near real-time
- Advantage: able to monitor large number of aircraft per day (conceptually, all which pass over ground stations)
- Disadvantage: aircraft must fly over HMU site

## Slide 13

## MONITORING SYSTEMS AND THE TWO ASPECTS OF SAFETY GOALS

**Ground-based systems to estimate aircraft geometric height now under development**
** ****Expect that outputs of these systems will help satisfy need for large quantity of aircraft height-keeping performance data necessary for examining satisfaction of TLS**
**Anticipate that existing GPS-based Monitoring System (GMS), improved with enhanced GPS Monitoring Unit, will play prominent role in supporting operator/aircraft satisfaction of monitoring requirements associated with RVSM approval process**
**Focus now on monitoring requirements for RVSM approval**

## Slide 15

## Slide 16

## MONITORING GOALS ASSOCIATED WITH STATE RVSM APPROVAL

## MINIMUM AIRCRAFT SYSTEM PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATION (MASPS)

**Performance which aircraft group must be capable of achieving in service, regardless of airspace where RVSM is applied**
**Mean altimetry system error (ASE) of the group < 80 ft in magnitude**
**Sum of the absolute value of the mean plus 3 standard deviations of ASE for group < 245 ft**
**Errors in altitude-keeping symmetric about a mean of     0 ft, have a standard deviation < 43 ft and have error frequency which decreases at least exponentially with increasing error magnitude**

## Monitoring Goals

**INITIAL MONITORING. In application to the appropriate State authority for RVSM approval, operators must show plan for meeting monitoring requirements necessary to receive RVSM approval.**
**AIRCRAFT STATUS FOR MONITORING. RVSM airworthiness approval must be granted prior to an aircraft being monitored.  Any exception to this rule will be coordinated with the State authority.**
**Participation in an approved monitoring program **_**is required**_** in accordance with the chart; however monitoring **_**not**_** required prior to the grant of RVSM operational approval**

## Monitoring Goals

**APPLICABILTY OF MONITORING FROM OTHER REGIONS.  Operator monitoring results obtained from one region is used for other regions’ requirements.**
**TRAILING CONE DATA.  If aircraft documented to be in approved RVSM configuration, trailing cone data can be used to fulfill monitoring requirements**
**FOLLOW-ON MONITORING.  Monitoring will continue after initial RVSM implementation.  A follow-on program will be defined later.**

## SATISFACTION OF MONITORING GOALS

**NAARMO will administer DRVSM monitoring program.**
**NAARMO has access to NAT, Asia Pacific and Eurocontrol monitoring results - monitoring results obtained from other Regions applicable to satisfaction of DRVSM monitoring requirements**
_**US Operators:**_**   NAARMO will receive US operator data from**
**	**** **_**US Operator/Aircraft RVSM Monitoring Coordinator**_
**NAARMO will coordinate with States and operators regarding individual-operator monitoring requirements**
**NAARMO will coordinate with States to confirm satisfaction of individual-operator requirements. **

## BACKGROUND TO ESTABLISHMENT OF CURRENT MONITORING GOALS - I 

**FAA participated actively in the introduction of the North Atlantic (NAT) and Pacific RVSM**
**NAT, Pacific and European monitoring has produced substantial number of height-keeping performance estimates for aircraft types typically observed **
**Monitoring requirements reduced substantially from original 1997 set as monitoring results for individual aircraft types became available and compliance with requirements was established with high confidence**

## BACKGROUND TO ESTABLISHMENT OF CURRENT MONITORING GOALS - II

**On-going review of monitoring goals to consider latest monitoring results**
**NAARMO recently adopted new format and monitoring groups recommended by ICAO RMA Work Group**

## MONITORING GOALS – Category 1

## MONITORING GOALS – Category 2

- *Note:  If 60 percent of the North American fleet yields a fractional number, round up to the next whole aircraft
- (e.g., for a fleet of 2 aircraft, 0.6 x 2 = 1.2; therefore, 2 aircraft must be monitored).

## MONITORING GOALS – Category 3

## Process to Perform Monitoring

- See RVSM Documentation Webpage
- See “Monitoring Requirements and Procedures” section