Natalie Zelkin and Stephen Henriksen

ITT Corporation Advanced Engineering & Sciences Division, Herndon, Virginia

L-Band Digital Aeronautical Communications

System Engineering—Concepts of Use, Systems

Performance, Requirements, and Architectures

NASA/CR—2010-216326

September 2010

SAA3–978–1
NASA STI Program . . . in Profi le

Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated to the 

advancement of aeronautics and space science. The 

NASA Scientifi c and Technical Information (STI) 

program plays a key part in helping NASA maintain 

this important role.

The NASA STI Program operates under the auspices 

of the Agency Chief Information Offi cer. It collects, 

organizes, provides for archiving, and disseminates 

NASA’s STI. The NASA STI program provides access 

to the NASA Aeronautics and Space Database and 

its public interface, the NASA Technical Reports 

Server, thus providing one of the largest collections 

of aeronautical and space science STI in the world. 

Results are published in both non-NASA channels 

and by NASA in the NASA STI Report Series, which 

includes the following report types:

• TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of 

completed research or a major signifi cant phase 

of research that present the results of NASA 

programs and include extensive data or theoretical 

analysis. Includes compilations of signifi cant 

scientifi c and technical data and information 

deemed to be of continuing reference value. 

NASA counterpart of peer-reviewed formal 

professional papers but has less stringent 

limitations on manuscript length and extent of 

graphic presentations.

• TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM. Scientifi c 

and technical fi ndings that are preliminary or 

of specialized interest, e.g., quick release 

reports, working papers, and bibliographies that 

contain minimal annotation. Does not contain 

extensive analysis.

• CONTRACTOR REPORT. Scientifi c and 

technical fi ndings by NASA-sponsored 

contractors and grantees.

• CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. Collected 

papers from scientifi c and technical 

conferences, symposia, seminars, or other 

meetings sponsored or cosponsored by NASA.

• SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientifi c, 

technical, or historical information from 

NASA programs, projects, and missions, often 

concerned with subjects having substantial 

public interest.

• TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. Englishlanguage translations of foreign scientifi c and 

technical material pertinent to NASA’s mission.

Specialized services also include creating custom 

thesauri, building customized databases, organizing 

and publishing research results.

For more information about the NASA STI 

program, see the following:

• Access the NASA STI program home page at 

http://www.sti.nasa.gov

• E-mail your question via the Internet to help@

sti.nasa.gov

• Fax your question to the NASA STI Help Desk 

at 443–757–5803

• Telephone the NASA STI Help Desk at

 443–757–5802

• Write to:

 NASA Center for AeroSpace Information (CASI)

 7115 Standard Drive

 Hanover, MD 21076–1320
Natalie Zelkin and Stephen Henriksen

ITT Corporation Advanced Engineering & Sciences Division, Herndon, Virginia

L-Band Digital Aeronautical Communications

System Engineering—Concepts of Use, Systems

Performance, Requirements, and Architectures

NASA/CR—2010-216326

September 2010

SAA3–978–1

National Aeronautics and

Space Administration

Glenn Research Center

Cleveland, Ohio 44135

Prepared under Cooperative Agreement NCC05CA85C
Available from

NASA Center for Aerospace Information

7115 Standard Drive

Hanover, MD 21076–1320

National Technical Information Service

5301 Shawnee Road

Alexandria, VA 22312

Available electronically at http://gltrs.grc.nasa.gov

Trade names and trademarks are used in this report for identifi cation 

only. Their usage does not constitute an offi cial endorsement, 

either expressed or implied, by the National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration.

Level of Review: This material has been technically reviewed by expert reviewer(s).

This report contains preliminary fi ndings, 

subject to revision as analysis proceeds.
NASA/CR—2010-216326 iii 

Preface 

This National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Contractor Report summarizes and 

documents the work performed to develop concepts of use (ConUse), System Requirements and 

Architecture for the proposed L-band (960 to 1164 MHz) terrestrial en route communications system. 

This work was completed under a NASA project-level agreement (PLA FY09_G1M.02-02v1) for 

“New ATM Requirements—Future Communications” in support of a Federal Aviation Administration 

(FAA)/European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation (EUROCONTROL) Cooperative 

Research Agreement (Action Plan 17 (AP–17)), commonly referred to as the Future Communications 

Study. The work was performed with the guidance of the FAA and NASA. 

NASA/CR—2010-216326 v 

Executive Summary 

ES.1 Introduction 

This document is created under the project-level agreement (PLA) (PLA FY09_G1M.02-02v1) for 

“New ATM [air traffic management] Requirements—Future Communications” and addresses concepts of 

use (ConUse), System Requirements and Architecture for the proposed L-band (960 to 1164 MHz) 

terrestrial en route communications system. 

The document becomes part of a hierarchy of documents capturing concepts related to the National 

Airspace System (NAS). NAS-level and similar level international concept of operations (ConOps) 

driving this ConUse and its associated requirements include the RTCA “National Airspace System 

Concept of Operations and Vision for the Future of Aviation” (Ref. 1), the “Joint Planning and 

Development Office (JPDO) Concept of Operations (ConOps) for the Next Generation Air Transportation 

System (NextGen)” (Ref. 2), and the “Global ATM Operational Concept Document (International Civil 

Aviation Organization (ICAO) 9854)” (Ref. 3). At the next lower layer, the European Organisation for the 

Safety of Air Navigation (EUROCONTROL) “Operating Concept of the Mobile Aviation 

Communication Infrastructure Supporting ATM Beyond 2015” (Ref. 4) was used with the service level 

ConOps, the Future Communications Study (FCS) Communications Operating Concept and 

Requirements (COCR) (Ref. 5) providing reference guidance for air/ground (A/G) and air/air (A/A) 

communications services operating concepts and requirements directly applicable to this ConUse. On a 

similar level to this ConUse, but with a different scope and intended for different services, are the 

operating concepts and requirements presented in the “Data Communications Safety and Performance 

Requirements (SPR)” (Ref. 6) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Final Program 

Requirements (FPR) for Data Communications (Ref. 7). 

ES.2 ConUse 

A process recommended in the “NAS System Engineering Manual” (SEM, Ref. 8) was used as a guide 

in developing ConUse and requirements for the proposed L-band Digital Aeronautical Communications 

System (L–DACS) during the joint FAA/EUROCONTROL FCS. Figure ES–1 presents the ConUse 

development process. 

Figure ES–1.—Concepts of use (ConUse) development process. Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. 

Identify Operational 

Need for a New 

System

• Describe Current 

A/G 

Communication 

System

• Current System 

Operational 

Environment

• Current System 

Objectives and 

Scope

• Current System 

Capability 

Shortfalls

• Constraints

Provide Proposed 

System Justification

• Potential 

Benefits of New 

Systems

• Operational 

Shortfalls 

Addressed by 

Data Comm

Program

• Description of 

Desired Change

• Change Priorities 

and Road Maps

• Assumptions and 

Constraints

Define Proposed 

System

• Objectives and 

Scope

• Proposed 

System in 

context of NAS 

EA Operational 

View

• System 

Description

• Operational 

Environment

• Frequency and 

Technology –

Environment, 

Requirements 

and Limitations

• Users

• Operational 

Policies and 

Constraints

Define CONUSE

• Use of the 

Proposed 

System per 

Flight Phase

• Data Link 

Messages 

Examples

• Operational 

Scenarios 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 vi 

In summary, the following steps were taken in developing the ConUse: 

(1) Identify operational needs for a new system and provide proposed system justification 

Operational needs for a new system are supported by describing the current system, its associated 

problems, and capability shortfalls. A good description of the FAA’s current analog A/G voice 

communications system used for air traffic control (ATC) can be found in the Next Generation 

Air/Ground Communications (NEXCOM) system requirements document (Ref. 9). 

The NextGen ConOps summarizes the current attributes (and associated constraints) of the voicebased A/G communications system as follows (Ref. 2): 

 Limited data communications for ATM and operational control 

 Limited access to real-time weather and aeronautical data 

 Voice communications routine for ATM 

 Analog voice 

 Analog weather information display systems 

 A/G and ground/ground (G/G) communications 

 Loss of communications due to beyond line-of-site (BLOS) aircraft position (e.g., over the ocean) 

 Individual ground systems for each information type brought to the flight deck 

 Point-to-point aircraft communications based on ATC sectors 

There are several principal shortcomings of the current A/G voice communications system, including 

lack of automation, limited or no data communications availability, aging infrastructure, technology 

limitations, and spectrum saturation. The resulting operational problems, if not addressed, could lead to 

service degradation and limit introduction of new or expanded services. These, in turn, could potentially 

compromise safety of operation and increase operating costs. Saturation of the very high frequency 

(VHF) spectrum is the problem specifically mitigated by the introduction of a new L-band system 

(L–DACS), while the other operational problems will likely be mitigated to a degree, dependent on the 

particular technology implemented with the L–DACS. 

Rather than being a NAS service itself, G/G and A/G communications are enablers of NAS services. 

It is important to note that the FAA’s Data Communications Program (Data Comm) FPR document 

recognizes that “the scope of the mission shortfalls identified herein [is] broader than will be addressed 

solely by a data communications capability” (Ref. 7). Because of the limitations and constraints of 

implementing data communications using VDL Mode 2 over a congested aeronautical VHF band, the 

Data Comm will focus principally on implementing the most critical air traffic services. This provides 

opportunities for L–DACS systems to augment Data Comm by enabling communications of less critical 

and essential air traffic services to address the shortfalls listed. The planned Data Communications 

Networks Services (DCNS) A/G data communications system being developed under the Data Comm is 

expected to be implemented before any L–DACS is implemented and should mitigate many of the current 

operational problems and shortcomings, while still leaving room for additional gains in overcoming 

current A/G communications problems or shortcoming potentially achievable by L–DACS. 

Assumptions and constraints for this document are as follows: 

 The proposed L–DACS is assumed to provide an increase in overall A/G communications 

systems capacity by utilizing the new spectrum (i.e., not VHF). 

 The scope of this ConUse and requirements document includes A/G communications and A/A 

communications. 

 L–DACS will be designed specifically for data communication. When finalized, the technology 

may support voice communications, but this feature is not considered a system requirement at this 

time. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 vii 

 This report assumes that the data communications system developed as part of Data Comm will 

precede an L–DACS implementation and deployment. 

 While some critical services are proposed, the L–DACS will also target noncritical services, such 

as weather advisory and aeronautical information services implemented as part of an airborne 

System Wide Information Management (SWIM) program. It may also target one or more 

unmanned aircraft system (UAS) communications services. 

 Although the L–DACS ConUse and functional requirements developed for the document are 

largely technology independent, services selection and overall system requirements may change if 

and/ or when additional and/or different data is available from proposed L–DACS interference 

testing and as a result of a final selection of one of two L–DACS technologies under 

consideration as of the time of this report. 

 L–DACS is to be designed and implemented in a manner that will not disrupt other existing 

services operating in the L-band. Additional interference research and testing will determine if 

any operational constraints are to be imposed, such as limiting the number of users, time of the 

day, duration, and so on. 

(2) Define Proposed System and ConUse 

L–DACS will be introduced as part of the proposed NextGen vision and will address continental en 

route and terminal maneuvering area (TMA) airspace A/G communications. 

In addition to potentially providing an alternative link technology suitable to support the FAA’s Data 

Communications Segment 3 requirements, including full four-dimensional trajectory-based operations 

(TBO). The L–DACS is also envisioned to support other future communications applications including 

mobile SWIM and UAS safety-critical data communications, UAS command and control, and monitoring 

of UAS onboard sense and avoid and automation capabilities. 

The NextGen communications systems will enable users to play a more active role in each of the 

NAS service areas. 

 NAS management (strategic flow and resource management): SWIM capability will enable 

stakeholders’ access to relevant information. Users will become key participants in the planning 

of traffic flow management and will utilize a comprehensive information exchange process to 

improve flight operations planning according to capacity and traffic conditions to minimize 

congestion and delays. 

 Flight planning and emergency alerting services: Users will have interactive flight-planning 

capabilities with an immediate access to real-time data. User-preferred routing will become 

available to properly equipped aircraft for both domestic and international flights. 

 Surface: Increased data exchange capabilities will provide more users at more airports with flight 

clearances, airports information, positions of other aircraft, taxi routes, and weather conditions 

(current, forecast, and hazardous). Users will have improved real-time planning with continuous 

update of the flight profile. 

 Arrival/departure and en route: A/G data exchange will enable more active flight deck 

participation in the decision making process. Users will utilize data, such as air traffic control 

clearances, current and forecast weather, notices to airmen hazardous weather warnings, updated 

charts, current weather, special use airspace status, and other required data. 

 Oceanic: A/G communication via L–DACS will not be provided in oceanic airspace. 

 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 viii 

Table ES–1provides a listing of the operational scenarios and concepts envisioned for the midterm 

NextGen for each of the flight phases. Though most, if not all, of these are currently envisioned for Data 

Comm, these are technology independent, and thus equally valid for an L–DACS implementation. 

TABLE ES–1.—NEXTGEN MIDTERM OPERATIONAL CONCEPTS FOR EACH FLIGHT PHASE (REF. 10) 

Phase of flight NextGen midterm communications operational concept 

Flight planning Access to flight planning information will be available to authorized users via a 

secure network and will include a publish-and-subscribe capability so that users 

can receive automatic updates when conditions change along the proposed flight 

path. 

Push back, taxi, and departure As the time for the flight approaches, the final flight path agreement will be 

delivered as a data message to pilots who access the agreement before beginning 

the flight. 

Climb and cruise Data communications will increase efficiency by providing routine and strategic 

information to the pilot and automating certain routine tasks for both the pilot 

and controller. 

A decreased number of voice communications also will reduce radio frequency 

congestion and eliminate verbal miscommunication—a great safety improvement 

that will reduce operational errors. 

Providing changes to radio frequencies and other information, such as local 

barometric pressure and required weather advisories, by data communications 

link can also reduce errors. 

When weather impacts numerous flights, clearances for data communications 

capable aircraft can be sent all at once, increasing controller and operator 

efficiency. 

If potential conflicts with other aircraft or other constraints, such as weather or 

homeland security interventions, develop along the path, the NextGen system 

will identify the problem and provide recommended path trajectory or speed 

changes to eliminate the conflict. The controller will send the pilot the proposed 

change via a data communications link, if the aircraft is equipped. 

When rerouting is required, the flight can be assigned precision offsets to the 

published route. These offsets will become a way of turning a single published 

route into a “multi-lane highway.” Use of offsets will increase capacity in a 

section of airspace. These reroutes can be tailored for each flight. Since the final 

agreement will be reached via data messaging, complex reroutes can be more 

detailed than those constrained by the limitations of voice communications and 

can reduce one source of error in communications. 

As weather and wind conditions change above the ocean, both individual reroutes 

and changes to the entire route structure will be managed via a data 

communications link. 

Descent and approach Information such as proposed arrival time, sequencing and route assignments will 

be exchanged with the aircraft via a data communications link to negotiate a final 

flight path. 

Landing, taxi, and arrival Before the flight lands, both the preferred taxiway to be used for exiting the 

runway and the taxi path to the assigned parking will be available to the flight 

crew via a data communications link. 

 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 ix 

Table ES–2 illustrates the potential operational use of the proposed L-band system based on the 

COCR services previously identified as potential applications (Ref. 11). 

TABLE ES–2.—USE OF THE PROPOSED L-BAND SYSTEM PER FLIGHT DOMAIN 

[Acronyms are defined in Appendix A.] 

 Predeparture 

APT 

domaina

Departure 

taxi APT 

domaina

Departure 

TMA 

domaina

ENR ORP 

and AOA 

domains 

Arrival 

TMA 

domaina

Arrival APT 

domaina

Arrival taxi 

APT 

domaina

Flight information 

services

D–OTIS

D–RVR

D–SIG

D–SIGMET

D–OTIS 

D–RVR 

D–SIG 

D–SIGMET 

D–ORIS 

D–OTIS 

D–RVR 

D–SIG 

D–SIGMET 

D–ORIS 

D–OTIS 

D–RVR 

D–SIGMET 

D–OTIS 

D–RVR 

D–SIG 

D–SIGMET 

D–OTIS 

D–RVR 

D–SIG 

D–RVR 

D–SIG 

Flight position, 

flight intent, and 

flight preferences 

services

PPD

FLIPSYWA

KE

PPD

FLIPSY

WAKE

PPD

FLIPSY

SAPb

WAKE

PPD

FLIPSY

SAP

WAKEc

PPD 

FLIPSY 

SAP 

WAKE 

PPD 

FLIPSY 

WAKE 

PPD 

FLIPSY 

WAKE

Advisory service DYNAV 

Emergency 

information service

URCO URCO URCO URCO URCO URCO URCO

Air/air service AIRSEP 

Unmanned Aircraft 

System (UAS) 

aervices

Pilot/UA control links, including telecommand and telemetry

Pilot/UA NavAids data exchanges

Relaying air traffic control (ATC) voice messages to and from UA pilots

Relaying air traffic services (ATS) data messages to and from UA pilots

UA-to-pilot downlinking of non-payload target track data

UA-to-pilot downlinking of data from UA-borne weather radars

UA-to-pilot downlinking of safety-related video data from UA to pilots

UA-to-pilot downlinking of safety-related sense and avoid automated decision-making from UA to pilots

Airborne SWIM 

suitable services 

(generally weather 

advisory and 

aeronautical 

information 

services)d

Aviation Digital Data Service (ADDS)

AWOS Data Acquisition Service (ADAS)

Expanded Terminal and Tower Data Service

General Information (GI) Message Distribution Service

Information Display System (IDS) Data Service

NextGen Network Enabled Weather (NNEW) Servicee

Notices to Airmen (NOTAM) Distribution Service

TMA Flight Data Service

WARP/WINS NEXRAD Service a

While the L-band system is proposed to be implemented with the primary objective of supporting en route and terminal 

communications (i.e., ENR and TMA domains), the L-band system could be used on the ground (i.e., airport domain) as well as 

in the air, for example, to avoid switching the links. As such, some ATC services are included in the table for the APT domain. b

SAP is primarily used En Route and terminal areas but is available in all phases of flight. c WAKE service is not available in AOA and ORP domains d

Though L–DACS could handle the technical and QoS requirements of these services, it is likely that these could more easily and 

inexpensively be provided by commercial links over unprotected spectrum (Ref. 11) e

It is possible that the information provided through the NNEW service could range from the advisory for routine forecasts 

through safety critical for certain hazardous weather warning messages, which might limit the extent to which this might be 

provided over commercial links. This requires further investigation.

A key NAS operational concepts source driving the L–DACS ConUse is the RTCA NAS ConOps. 

Appendix A presents a comprehensive listing derived from the RTCA NAS ConOps of future 

communications concepts to enable transfer of the following NAS information types: 

 Surveillance 

 Weather 

 Flight planning 

 Aeronautical information 

 Resource management 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 x 

When discussing an impact of introducing the new L-band system, it should be emphasized that the 

proposed L–DACS is designed to augment current operations and is not intended to replace any of the 

existing services. The proposed system is expected to further increase safety and efficiency of current 

operations. An introduction of the proposed L-band system should require no changes to the existing 

L-band services operating in the same band by utilizing inlay technology and/or other interference 

mitigation techniques. 

ES.3 Requirements 

A “middle-out” approach was adopted for the concepts and requirements developed for L–DACS. 

Functional System Requirements were derived by merging the requirements identified in the “bottom-up” 

assessment with those derived as a result of the “top-down” analysis. The top-down requirements result 

from developing the ConUse and the associated functional requirements, including analyzing the NAS 

SR–1000. In parallel with that process, a bottom-up assessment of existing requirements provided in 

relevant documents such as the COCR, the Data Comm performance requirements, and documents 

associated with specific potential applications identified in Task 6 was performed. 

The future communications infrastructure (FCI) aeronautical data services definition task report 

(Ref. 11) classifies all of the COCR ATS data services as safety critical. It further identifies services that 

are not planned to be implemented by the Data Comm program through Segment 3, and identifies them as 

possible candidates for implementation via C-band and/or L-band DACS. It must be stressed that both 

C-band and L-band DACS are being developed for the future communications infrastructure to 

accommodate safety and regularity of flight services and designed to operate over aviation protected 

spectrum, so any COCR ATS service could be could be implemented via one or the other of these links 

(as appropriate). 

As described earlier, this document is focused on the non-Data Comm COCR ATS data services 

proposed as candidates for L–DACS as listed. 

L–DACS could provide a communication link to transfer surveillance and weather information, 

facilitate flight and resource management, enhance collaborative decision making, and enable exchange 

of aeronautical information in the future NAS. Table 19 through Table 23 of Appendix A document the 

select RTCA NAS ConOps (Ref. 1) found applicable to the proposed L–DACS.1

 

Table ES–3 presents System Requirements2

 associated with the identified functionality. 

TABLE ES–3.—MAPPING OF SYSTEM FUNCTIONS TO SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS 

System Functions System Requirements 

Enable ground/air (G/A) and air/ground (A/G) 

communication for fixed-to-mobile as well as 

mobile-to-mobile users. 

The system shall enable G/A communication for fixed-to-mobile users. 

The system shall enable G/A communication for mobile-to-mobile users. 

The system shall enable A/G communication for fixed-to-mobile users. 

The system shall enable A/G communication for mobile-to-mobile users. 

Enable air/air (A/A) communication The system shall enable A/A communication. 

Support addressed communication for delivery of 

information to individual and multiple users 

The system shall support addressed communication for delivery of 

information to individual users. 

The system shall support addressed communication for delivery of 

information to multiple users. 

Support broadcast communication for delivery of 

information to multiple users 

The system shall support broadcast communication for delivery of 

information to multiple users. 

Support delivery of real-time information in a timely 

manner 

The system shall support delivery of real-time information in a timely 

manner. 

 

1 While the RTCA document describes the NAS evolution in terms of three time periods—near (up to 2005), mid 

(2005 to 2010), and far (beyond 2010). Concepts identified in the document are found applicable for the proposed 

L–DACS even though it is likely to be implemented beyond 2020–2025. 2

 Note that all requirements presented in the document are documented as “system shall” not system “system must.”
NASA/CR—2010-216326 xi 

TABLE ES–3.—MAPPING OF SYSTEM FUNCTIONS TO SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS 

System Functions System Requirements 

Enable demand, periodic, and event communication The system shall enable demand communication. 

The system shall enable periodic communication. 

The system shall enable event communication. 

Accommodate a wide range of data types (e.g., 

surveillance reports, weather raw data and products, 

flight profiles) to support common situational 

awareness 

The system shall accommodate a wide range of data types (e.g., 

surveillance reports, weather raw data and products, flight profiles) to 

support common situational awareness 

Support multiple quality-of-service (QoS) provisions The system shall support multiple QoS offerings, such as priority and 

preemption capabilities. 

Support authentication of users and controlled access 

to NAS information (security) 

The system shall support authentication of users (security) 

The system shall support controlled access to NAS information 

(security). 

Provide support of both Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) and non-FAA ground and 

airborne usersa

The system shall provide support of FAA ground users. 

The system shall provide support of FAA airborne users. 

The system shall provide support of non-FAA ground users. 

The system shall provide support of non-FAA airborne users. 

Avoid single points of failure The system shall avoid single points of failure. 

Provide a scalable solution The system shall provide a scalable solution. 

Provide standards-based solution The system shall provide standards-based solution. 

a

To support increasing collaboration among NAS users, the proposed system shall accommodate a wide range of NAS users by 

accepting NAS data from NAS data sources, both internal and external to the FAA. Users may include aircraft, airline 

operation centers, service providers, FAA users, and other government agencies. 

Appendix A presents hierarchical decomposition of functional requirements as diagrams and in an 

outline format. 

The identified NAS ConOps were then traced to the desired functionality of the proposed network. 

Table Es–4 below maps concepts of use identified in the ConUse activities and described in the preceding 

sections to specific functions necessary to enable those concepts. These functions are grouped into 

appropriate functional hierarchies and functional requirements are derived. The table presents the 

mapping of NAS ConOps to L–DACS functional requirements and proposed capabilities. This 

encompasses a top-down approach to the development of functional requirements. Mapping the proposed 

services to the desired system capabilities and functional architectures presents combined functional 

requirements from the top-down and bottom-up approaches. 

TABLE ES–4.—TRACING L–DACS FUNCTIONALITY TO NATIONAL AIRPSACE SYSTEM (NAS) CONCEPTS OF 

OPERATIONS (CONOPS) 

[Acronyms are defined in Appendix A.] 

Desired L–DACS capabilities NAS ConOps references Functional hierarchy 

reference 

COCR air traffic 

services 

Enable ground/air and air/ground 

communication for fixed to mobile as 

well as mobile to mobile users. 

S–1a; S–3; S–4; 

W–2; W–3; W–5; W–9; W–10; 

W–11; W–12; W–14; W–15; W–

16; W–17; W–19; W–20; W–22; 

W–27; 

FM–3; FM–6; FM–9; FM–11; 

FM–13; FM–17; FM–21; FM–22; 

FM 24; FM–32; FM–41, FM–42; 

A–5; A–14; A–23; A–26; A–28; 

A–29; A–30; A–33; A–34 

L.1.1.1.1 

L.1.1.1.2 

L.1.1.2.1 

L.1.1.2.2 

D–ORIS 

D–OTIS 

D–RVR 

DYNAV 

FLIPCY 

SAP 

WAKE 

PPD 

URCO 

Enable air/air communication S–7; 

W–26 

L.1.1.3.1 AIRSEP 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 xii 

TABLE ES–4.—TRACING L–DACS FUNCTIONALITY TO NATIONAL AIRPSACE SYSTEM (NAS) CONCEPTS OF 

OPERATIONS (CONOPS) 

[Acronyms are defined in Appendix A.] 

Desired L–DACS capabilities NAS ConOps references Functional hierarchy 

reference 

COCR air traffic 

services 

Support addressed communication for 

delivery of information to individual 

and multiple users 

S–1; 

W–12; 

FM–11; FM–13 

L.1.1.1.1 

L.1.1.1.2 

L.1.1.2.1 

L.1.1.2.2 

L.1.1.3.1 

D–ORIS 

D–OTIS 

D–RVR 

DYNAV 

FLIPCY 

SAP 

PPD 

URCO 

AIRSEP 

Support broadcast communication for 

delivery of information to multiple 

users 

S–1; S–4; 

W–2; W–3; W–14; W–16; W–20; 

W–26; 

FM–13; 

A–23 

L.1.1.1.1 

L.1.1.1.2 

L.1.1.2.1 

L.1.1.2.2 

L.1.1.3.1 

D–ORIS 

D–OTIS 

D–RVR 

WAKE 

URCO 

AIRSEP 

Support delivery of real-time 

information in a timely manner 

S–1; S–3; 

W–10; W–18; W–22; W–24 

FM–3; FM–6; FM–14; FM–17; 

FM–22; FM–35; 

A–22; A–31; 

FM–4; FM–15; FM–25; FM–34; 

RM–3; RM–15; 

A–9; A–15 

D–RVR 

DYNAV 

FLIPCY 

SAP 

WAKE 

PPD 

URCO 

AIRSEP 

Enable demand, periodic, and event 

communication 

S–1; S–8; 

W–14; W–19; W–20 

All services 

Accommodate a wide range of data 

types (e.g., surveillance reports, 

weather raw data and products, flight 

profiles, etc.) to support common 

situational awareness 

S–3; 

W–2; W–3; 

A–4; A–11; A–33 

All services 

Support multiple quality-of-service 

(QoS), priority, etc. 

All services 

Support authentication of users and 

controlled access to NAS information 

(security) 

W–1 All services 

Provide support of both Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA) and 

non-FAA ground and airborne users 

S–1; 

FM–18; FM–21; FM–26; FM–29; 

A–18; A–22; A–33; A–35 

Avoid single points of failure RM–14 All services 

Provide a scalable solution All services 

Provide standards-based solution All services a

While only select NAS ConOps are presented for this L–DACS capability, most NAS ConOps could be traced to enabling

ground/air and/or air/ground communication.

ES.4 Architecture 

An L–DACS physical architecture can be derived from and represents a technical solution to the 

functional architecture and requirements. Figure ES–2 shows a high-level notional architecture of the 

L–DACS system supporting A/G communication. The ground infrastructure comprises of a number of 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 xiii 

L–DACS ground radio stations, each providing a cell-like coverage area, and which are geographically 

situated to provide overlapping coverage (using different frequencies) to achieve seamless cell handovers. 

Each ground radio station would be connected to some G/G network through some ground network 

interface (number 1 in Figure ES–2). 

Figure ES–2.—L–DACS architecture.

The L–DACS architecture can be further decomposed. The components would be responsible for 

providing the functions identified in Appendix A and meeting L–DACS functional and performance 

requirements identified in Section 4 of this document. 

This architecture is necessarily presented at a high level because the L–DACS ConUse so far are very 

broad in scope. Most of the identified high-level functional and performance requirements cannot be readily 

allocated to the components shown in Figure ES–2. More specifically defined ConUse and associated 

scenarios would make it more appropriate to further decompose the requirements and allow allocation of 

specific requirements to specific architecture components. This activity is recommended for Phase II. 

ES.5 Conclusion 

As the Data Comm is fully engaged in the development of VDL Mode 2 capabilities as of the time of 

this study, the FAA will follow the EUROCONTROL lead in L-band system development and plans to 

provide support under the pending Action Plan 30 (AP–30) FCI work plan in conducting the research and 

technology development for the FCI based on ICAO-endorsed findings and recommendations of the AP–

17 FCS. Activities may include but will not be limited to 

 Supporting joint FAA/EUROCONTROL development and evaluation of the L–DACS system 

concepts, specifications, and prototype 

 Co-development of a joint interference testing program 

 Further refinement of the upper layers of the L–DACS protocol stack 

These activities will be highly dependent on cooperative planning with the European L–DACS 

team(s) and their schedule.

Aircraft

ATSP Facility

End System Interface/

Gateway

G/G 

Network

Ground 

Station

Radio 

System

End 

System

User 

Controls/

Displays

2

3

4

5

7

Interface Description

1 GS to G/G Network

2 GS to GS Antenna

3 GS Antenna RF Interface

4 A/C Antenna RF Interface

5 A/C Radio to A/C Antenna

6 A/C Radio to A/C End 

System

7 A/C Radio to A/C 

Controls/Displays

6

1

L-DACS Physical 

Architecture

Ground 

Station

Ground 

Station

NASA/CR—2010-216326 xv 

Contents

Preface ......................................................................................................................................................... iii

Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... v

ES.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... v

ES.2 ConUse ................................................................................................................................................ v

ES.3 Requirements ....................................................................................................................................... x

ES.4 Architecture ....................................................................................................................................... xii

ES.5 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................ xiii

1.0 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background ............................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 System Overview ...................................................................................................................... 2

1.3 Document Overview .................................................................................................................. 3

2.0 ConUse and Requirements Development Processes ............................................................................ 4

3.0 Concepts of Use ................................................................................................................................... 8

3.1 ConUse Development Process .................................................................................................. 8

3.2 Operational Needs ..................................................................................................................... 8

3.2.1 Current Air-to-Ground Communication System .......................................................... 8

3.2.2 Current System Operational Environment ................................................................... 9

3.2.3 Current System Users ................................................................................................. 13

3.2.4 Current System Objectives and Scope ....................................................................... 13

3.3 New Airport Surface Communications Systems Justification ................................................ 16

3.3.1 Potential Benefits of New Airport Surface Communications Systems ...................... 16

3.3.2 Operational Shortfalls Addressed by Data Comm ..................................................... 18

3.3.3 Description of Desired Changes ................................................................................. 19

3.3.4 Change Priorities and Roadmaps ............................................................................... 19

3.3.5 Assumptions and Constraints for L–DACS ............................................................... 22

3.4 Proposed L–DACS System ..................................................................................................... 22

3.4.1 Objectives and Scope ................................................................................................. 22

3.4.2 Proposed System Description ..................................................................................... 23

3.4.3 Frequency and Technology—Environment, Requirements, and Limitations ............ 27

3.4.4 User Impact ................................................................................................................ 29

3.4.5 Operational Policies and Constraints ......................................................................... 30

3.5 L–DACS Concepts of Use ...................................................................................................... 30

3.5.1 RTCA National Airspace System Concepts of Operations Guidance ........................ 30

3.5.2 Data Comm Operational Scenarios ............................................................................ 31

3.5.3 Proposed Services ...................................................................................................... 31

3.5.4 NextGen Communications Operational Concepts ...................................................... 35

3.5.5 Communications Operational Services and Concepts Based on Flight 

Domain ....................................................................................................................... 36

3.5.6 L–DACS Operational Concepts Derived from the COCR ......................................... 39

4.0 L–DACS System Requirements ........................................................................................................ 41

4.1 L–DACS System Requirements Development Process .......................................................... 41

4.2 Functional Requirements for L–DACS Services—Bottom-Up Assessment ........................... 41

4.3 L–DACS Functional System Requirements—Top-Down Approach ...................................... 45

4.3.1 Prior Functional Analysis ........................................................................................... 45

4.3.2 L–DACS Concepts-of-Operations-Based Functional Analysis ................................. 46

4.4 Infrastructure Requirements—Communications ..................................................................... 51

4.5 Performance Requirements ..................................................................................................... 52

4.6 L–DACS Spectrum Requirements .......................................................................................... 55

4.7 L–DACS User Requirements .................................................................................................. 56
NASA/CR—2010-216326 xvi 

4.8 Regulatory Requirements ........................................................................................................ 57

4.9 Safety and Security Requirements Applicable to L–DACS .................................................... 57

5.0 Synthesis (Physical Architecture) ...................................................................................................... 58

5.1 System Context........................................................................................................................ 58

5.2 Synthesis Process .................................................................................................................... 58

5.3 L–DACS Physical Architecture .............................................................................................. 59

6.0 Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) .................................................................................................. 61

6.1 Unmanned Aircraft System Operations ................................................................................... 61

6.2 Need for Change and Impact on Existing Unmanned Aircract System Operations ................ 64

6.3 Unmanned Aircaft System ConUse and Functional Analysis ................................................. 64

6.4 Unmanned Aircraft System Applications ................................................................................ 66

6.5 Operational Scenarios .............................................................................................................. 67

6.6 Unmanned Aircraft System Requirements .............................................................................. 68

6.6.1 Spectrum Requirements ............................................................................................. 68

6.6.2 Safety and Latency Requirements .............................................................................. 68

6.6.3 Other Requirements .................................................................................................... 68

6.7 Additional Safety Considerations and Assumptions ............................................................... 69

6.8 Unmanned Aircraft System Architecture and Interfaces ......................................................... 69

7.0 Preliminary Inputs to L–DACS Design ............................................................................................. 70

7.1 Scope ....................................................................................................................................... 70

7.2 L–DACS Implementation and Transition Issues ..................................................................... 70

7.2.1 L-Band System Development Objectives (FAA Long-Term Plans) .......................... 70

7.2.2 Technology Evaluation (EUROCONTROL Long-Term Plans) ................................ 71

7.2.3 L-Band System Implementation ................................................................................. 74

7.2.4 L-Band System Transition Issues ............................................................................... 75

7.2.5 Relationship between the Proposed Systems ............................................................. 77

7.3 Summary of the Analyses ........................................................................................................ 78

7.3.1 Design Specifications Development Process ............................................................. 78

7.3.2 Spectrum Requirements and Channelization .............................................................. 79

7.3.3 Design Specifications and Prototype Development ................................................... 83

Appendix A.—Acronyms and Abbreviations ............................................................................................. 85

Appendix B.—National Airspace System Concept of Operations Applicable to the Proposed 

L–DACS ............................................................................................................................................ 93

Appendix C.—Hierarchical Diagrams of Functional Requirements ........................................................ 105

Appendix D.—N2

 Charts .......................................................................................................................... 119

Appendix E.—Spectrum Requirements for Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) communications .......... 125

E.1 Single UA Throughput Needs ............................................................................................... 125

E.2 Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Deployment Scenario .................................................... 125

E.3 Aggregate Assessment of Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Spectrum Needs .................. 126

E.4 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 129

Appendix F.—L-Band Spectrum Applicability for Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) 

Applications ..................................................................................................................................... 131

Appendix G.—References ........................................................................................................................ 133
NASA/CR—2010-216326 xvii 

List of Figures 

Figure ES–1.—Concepts of use (ConUse) development process. Acronyms are defined in 

Appendix A. ......................................................................................................................................... v

Figure ES–2.—L–DACS architecture. ....................................................................................................... xiii

Figure 1.—Communications systems covered by this ConUse document (slightly altered version 

of Figure 1–1 in Ref. 14). .................................................................................................................... 2

Figure 2.—National Airspace System (NAS) engineering concept document hierarchy (Ref. 8). 

Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. ................................................................................................ 4

Figure 3.—Requirements management process flow (Ref. 8). Acronyms are defined in Appendix 

A. ......................................................................................................................................................... 6

Figure 4.—L–DACS ConUse and system requirements development flow chart. Acronyms are 

defined in Appendix A. ........................................................................................................................ 7

Figure 5.—ConUse development process. .................................................................................................... 8

Figure 6.—Current en route air-to-ground (A/G) communications system (Ref. 9). Acronyms are 

defined in Appendix A. ........................................................................................................................ 9

Figure 7.—System View 2 (SV–2) command and control detailed air-to-ground communications 

view for 2009 to 2010 (Ref. 17). Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. ......................................... 11

Figure 8.—Current National Airspace System air-to-ground communications operational 

problems. ........................................................................................................................................... 14

Figure 9.—Operational capabilities of Data Comm (Ref. 21). Acronyms are defined in 

Appendix A. ....................................................................................................................................... 19

Figure 10.—Evolution overview of aeronautical mobile communications (Ref. 20; note that this 

schedule is subject to change). Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. ............................................. 20

Figure 11.—Federal Aviation Administration communications roadmap (Ref. 22). Acronyms are 

defined in Appendix A. ...................................................................................................................... 21

Figure 12.—Target plan for expedited L–DACS development and deployment in Europe 

(November 2007) (Ref. 20). .............................................................................................................. 21

Figure 13.—Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) operational view in 2025 

(Ref. 26) Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. ............................................................................... 23

Figure 14.—System view 2 (SV–2) 2025 communications description: command and control 

(Ref. 27). Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. .............................................................................. 25

Figure 15.—Range of features in the NextGen system (Ref. 2). ................................................................ 26

Figure 16.—Proposed NextGen support environment. ............................................................................... 27

Figure 17.—Communication system capacity demand and user base changes. ......................................... 29

Figure 18.—Airborne System Wide Information Management (SWIM) and other Next 

Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) programs (Ref. 28). Acronyms are 

defined in Appendix A. ...................................................................................................................... 33

Figure 19.—Air-to-ground data link management and aircraft participation in System Wide 

Information Management (SWIM) (slightly modified from Ref. 30). Copyright Thales Air 

Systems; used with permission. Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. ........................................... 34

Figure 20.—System Wide Information Management (SWIM) execution by segments (Ref. 28). ............. 35

Figure 21.—Typical National Airspace System (NAS) flight profile and the air traffic services 

(ATS) functions (Ref. 7). .................................................................................................................. 35

Figure 22.—Functional flow block diagram (from Ref. 8). ........................................................................ 46

Figure 23.—N2 diagram (from Ref. 8). ...................................................................................................... 46

Figure 24.—Example hierarchical decomposition of a National Airspace System (NAS) 

architecture air traffic service (slightly modified figure from Ref. 32). ............................................ 51

Figure 25.—National Airspace System enterprise architecture airborne elements and remote 

facilities (Ref. 18). Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. ............................................................... 58

Figure 26.—System requirements and architecture development synthesis loop (Ref. 8). ........................ 59
NASA/CR—2010-216326 xviii 

Figure 27.—L–DACS architecture. Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. .............................................. 60

Figure 28.—L–DACS ground station components. .................................................................................... 60

Figure 29.—High-level unmanned aircraft operational functions (Ref. 36). .............................................. 64

Figure 30.—Unmanned aircraft system applications (from proposed changes to Ref. 35). ....................... 67

Figure 31.—Unmanned aircraft system (UAS) notional architecture (Ref. 36). Acronyms are 

defined in Appendix A. ...................................................................................................................... 69

Figure 32.—EUROCONTROL L-band technology selection schedule (September) (Ref. 39). It 

should be noted that an earlier plan for L–DACS-related activities, as documented in 

Ref. 40, included 2010 instead of 2011 as completion of testing and evaluation and 

beginning of L–DACS selection. ....................................................................................................... 72

Figure 33.—SESAR CNS systems and infrastructure roadmap (Ref. 41). Acronyms are defined in 

Appendix A. ....................................................................................................................................... 74

Figure 34.—Proposed L-band communications system capabilities. ......................................................... 75

Figure 35.—Relationship between the L-band system and the VDL–2 and C-band systems. 

Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. .............................................................................................. 77

Figure 36.—Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) System Engineering Manual (SEM) 

requirements and architecture definition process (Ref. 8). ................................................................ 78

Figure 37.—Systems operating in the 960- to 1215-MHz band (Ref. 45). Copyright Mileridge 

Ltd.; used with permission. Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. .................................................. 80

Figure 38.—L-band communications system high level. ......................................................................... 105

Figure 39.—Decomposition of use L-band communications system (transmit/receive messages). ......... 105

Figure 40.—Decomposition of transceive fixed-to-mobile message. ....................................................... 106

Figure 41.—Decomposition of transceive mobile-to-fixed message. ....................................................... 107

Figure 42.—Decomposition of transceive airborne-mobile-to-airborne-mobile messages. ..................... 108

Figure 43.—Generic decomposition of transceive data message. ............................................................ 109

Figure 44.—Generic decomposition of initiate data message. ................................................................. 109

Figure 45.—Generic decomposition of process data message for sending. .............................................. 109

Figure 46.—Generic decomposition of send data message. ..................................................................... 109

Figure 47.—Generic decomposition of process received data message. .................................................. 110

Figure 48.—Generic decomposition of deliver data message. ................................................................. 110

Figure 49.—Generic decomposition of provide failure processing. ......................................................... 110

Figure 50.—Decomposition of operate L-band communications system. ................................................ 111

Figure 51.—Decomposition of monitor L-band communications system. ............................................... 111

Figure 52.—Decomposition of maintain L-band communications system. .............................................. 112

Figure 53.—Decomposition of configure L-band communications system. ............................................ 113

Figure 54.—Level 2 N2

 chart, L.1 L–DACS communication system. ...................................................... 119

Figure 55.—Level 3 N2

 chart, L.1.1 provide air traffic control communications over L-band 

communications system. .................................................................................................................. 119

Figure 56.—Level 4 N2

 chart,L.1.1.1 transceive fixed-to-mobile message. ............................................. 119

Figure 57.—Level 7 N2

 chart, L.1.1.x.x.x.2 transceive data message. ..................................................... 119

Figure 58.—Level 8 N2

 chart, L.1.1.x.x.x.2.1 initiate data message. ....................................................... 120

Figure 59.—Level 9 N2

 chart, L.1.1.x.x.x.2.x.x. provide failure processing. ........................................... 121

Figure 60.—Level 8 N2

 chart, L.1.1.x.x.x.2.2 process data message for sending. ................................... 121

Figure 61.—Level 8 N2

 chart, L.1.1.x.x.x.2.3 send data message. ........................................................... 121

Figure 62.—Level 8 N2

 chart, L.1.1.x.x.x.2.4 process received data message. ........................................ 121

Figure 63.—Level 8 N2

 chart, L.1.1.x.x.x.2.5 deliver data message. ....................................................... 122

Figure 64.—Level 4 N2

 chart, L.1.1.2 transceive mobile-to-fixed message. ............................................ 122

Figure 65.—Level 3 N2

 chart, L.1.2 operate L-band communication system. ......................................... 122

Figure 66.—Level 4 N2

 chart, L.1.2.1 monitor L-band communication system. ...................................... 122

Figure 67.—Level 4 N2

 chart, L.1.2.2 maintain L-band communication system. .................................... 122

Figure 68.—Level 5 N2

 chart, L.1.2.2.1 perform preventative maintenance. ........................................... 123
NASA/CR—2010-216326 xix 

Figure 69.—Level 5 N2 chart, L.1.2.2.2 perform corrective maintenance. ............................................... 123

Figure 70.—Level 4 N2

 chart, L.1.2.3 configure L-band communication system. ................................... 123

Figure 71.—Level 5 N2

 chart, L.1.2.3.2 configure communication path. ................................................. 123

Figure 72.—Level 5 N2

 chart, L.1.2.3.3 configure security. ..................................................................... 123

Figure 73.—Links involved for line of sight (LOS). Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. .................. 127

Figure 74.—Links involved for beyond line-of-sight (BLOS) via satellite (with onboard 

processing). Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. ........................................................................ 127

Figure 75.—Links involved for beyond line-of-sight (BLOS) via satellite (without onboard 

processing). Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. ........................................................................ 128

NASA/CR—2010-216326 xxi 

List of Tables 

TABLE ES–1.—NEXTGEN MIDTERM OPERATIONAL CONCEPTS FOR EACH FLIGHT 

PHASE (REF. 10) ............................................................................................................................. viii

TABLE ES–2.—USE OF THE PROPOSED L-BAND SYSTEM PER FLIGHT DOMAIN ..................... ix

TABLE ES–3.—MAPPING OF SYSTEM FUNCTIONS TO SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS .................... x

TABLE ES–4.—TRACING L–DACS FUNCTIONALITY TO NATIONAL AIRPSACE 

SYSTEM (NAS) CONCEPTS OF OPERATIONS (ConOps) ........................................................... xi

TABLE 1.—MAPPING AIR-TO-GROUND VOICE COMMUNICATIONS FUNCTIONS TO 

NATIONAL AIRSPACE SERVICE (NAS) SERVICE CAPABILITIES (REF. 16). ...................... 12

TABLE 2.—CURRENT SHORTFALLS RELATED TO AIRPORT SURFACE AIR-TOGROUND VOICE COMMUNICATIONS ....................................................................................... 15

TABLE 3.—COMMUNICATION ALLOCATION BETWEEN VOICE AND DATA LINK 

(D/L) .................................................................................................................................................. 17

TABLE 4.—L–DACS OPTIONS KEY CHARACTERISTICS (REF. 20) ............................................... 28

TABLE 5.—NEXT GENERATION AIR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM (NextGen) 

MIDTERM OPERATIONAL CONCEPTS FOR THE AIRPORT SURFACE ................................ 36

TABLE 6.—USE OF THE PROPOSED L-BAND SYSTEM IN THE AIRPORT FLIGHT 

DOMAIN ........................................................................................................................................... 37

TABLE 7.—EXAMPLE L-BAND DATA LINK MESSAGES ................................................................ 38

TABLE 8.—EXAMPLE OPERATIONAL SCENARIOS ......................................................................... 39

TABLE 9.—NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM (NAS) FUNCTIONS ................................................... 41

TABLE 10.—MAPPING OF L–DACS SYSTEM FUNCTIONS TO SYSTEM 

REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................................................................. 47

TABLE 11.—MAPPING L–DACS FUNCTIONALITY TO NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM 

(NAS) CONCEPTS OF OPERATIONS (ConOps) ........................................................................... 48

TABLE 12.—MAPPING RELEVANT COMMUNICATIONS FUNCTIONS TO NATIONAL 

AIRSPACE SYSTEM (NAS) SERVICE CAPABILITIES (REF. 16) ............................................. 50

TABLE 13.—NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM (NAS) PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS .......... 52

TABLE 14.—L–DACS DATA REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................... 55

TABLE 15.—NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM (NAS) SPECTRUM REQUIREMENTS 

APPLICABLE TO THE PROPOSED L–DACS ............................................................................... 55

TABLE 16.—AVIATION USER REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................... 56

TABLE 17.—REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................... 57

TABLE 18.—UAS OPERATIONAL SCENARIOS .................................................................................. 67

TABLE 19.—THE ROLE OF SURVEILLANCE INFORMATION: RTCA NATIONAL 

AIRSPACE SYSTEM (NAS) CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS (ConOps) APPLICABLE TO 

THE PROPOSED L–DACS .............................................................................................................. 93

TABLE 20.—THE ROLE OF SURVEILLANCE INFORMATION: RTCA NATIONAL 

AIRSPACE SYSTEM (NAS) CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS (ConOps) APPLICABLE TO 

THE PROPOSED L–DACS .............................................................................................................. 94

TABLE 21.—IDENTIFICATION OF THE ROLE OF FLIGHT MANAGEMENT 

INFORMATION—RTCA NATIONAL AIRPSACE SYSTEM (NAS) CONCEPT OF 

OPERATIONS (ConOps) .................................................................................................................. 96

TABLE 22.—IDENTIFICATION OF THE ROLE OF AERONAUTICAL INFORMATION—

RTCA NATIONAL AIRPSACE (NAS) CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS (ConOps) ....................... 99

TABLE 23.—IDENTIFICATION OF THE ROLE OF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 

INFORMATION—RTCA NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM (NAS) CONCEPT OF 

OPERATIONS (ConOps) ................................................................................................................ 102

TABLE 24.—TERRESTRIAL ESTIMATED NONPAYLOAD THROUGHPUT 

REQUIREMENTS OF A SINGLE UNMANNED AIRCRAFT IN BITS/S .................................. 125
NASA/CR—2010-216326 xxii 

TABLE 25.—SATELLITE ESTIMATED NONPAYLOAD THROUGHPUT REQUIREMENTS 

OF A SINGLE UNMANNED AIRCRAFT IN BITS/S .................................................................. 125

TABLE 26.—MAXIMUM NONPAYLOAD THROUGHPUT REQUIREMENTSa

 OF A 

SINGLE UNMANNED AIRCRAFT IN BITS/S ............................................................................ 125

TABLE 27.—UNMANNED AIRCRAFTY (UA) DENSITY (60% OF UA AVAILABLE FOR 

OPERATION) ................................................................................................................................. 126

TABLE 28.—NUMBER OF UNMANNED AIRCRAFT PER FOOTPRINT OF THE 

SATELLITE .................................................................................................................................... 126

TABLE 29.—NUMBER OF UNMANNED AIRCRAFT (UA) OPERATING AT PEAK TIMESa

 ....... 126

TABLE 30.—AGGREGATE SPECTRUM REQUIREMENTS ............................................................. 126

TABLE 31.—METHODOLOGY 2—COMPARISON OF AGGREGATE BANDWIDTH 

REQUIREMENTS ........................................................................................................................... 128
 NASA/CR—2010-216326 1 

1.0 Introduction 

1.1 Background 

During the past 4 years, NASA Glenn Research Center and ITT have conducted a three-phase 

technology assessment for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) under the joint FAA–

EUROCONTROL cooperative research Action Plan (AP–17), also known as the Future Communications 

Study (FCS). NASA/ ITT provided system engineering evaluation of candidate technologies for the 

future communications infrastructure (FCI) to be used in air traffic management (ATM). Specific 

recommendations for data communications technologies in very high frequency (VHF), C, L, and satellite 

bands, and a set of follow-on research and implementation actions have been endorsed by the FAA, 

EUROCONTROL, and the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). In the United States, the 

recommendations from AP–17 are reflected in the FAA’s “Next Generation Air Transportation System 

Integrated Work Plan” (Ref. 12) and are represented in the “National Airspace System (NAS) Enterprise 

Architecture” (Ref. 13) communications and avionics roadmaps. 

Action Plan 30 (AP–30), a proposed follow-on cooperative research action plan to AP–17, is 

expected to start in fiscal year (FY) 2010 to ensure coordinated development of FCI to help enable the 

advanced ATM concepts of operation (ConOps) envisioned for both the Next Generation Air 

Transportation System (NextGen) in the United States and for EUROCONTROL’s Single European 

Systems ATM Research (SESAR) program in Europe. Follow-on research and technology development 

recommended by ITT and NASA Glenn and endorsed by the FAA was included in the FAA’s NextGen 

Implementation Plan 2009. The plan was officially released at the NextGen Web site (http://www.faa. 

gov/about/initiatives/nextgen/) on January 30, 2009. The implementation plan includes an FY09 Solution 

Set Work Plan for C-band and L-band future communications research under the section, “New Air 

Traffic Management (ATM) Requirements.” 

On February 27, 2009, the FAA approved a project-level agreement (PLA) (PLA FY09_G1M.02-

02v1) for “New ATM Requirements—Future Communications,” to perform the FY09 portion of the 

FAA’s solution-set work plan; this includes development of concepts of use (ConUse), requirements, and 

architecture for both a new C-band airport surface wireless communications system and a new L-band 

terrestrial en route communications system. 

In addition to potentially providing an alternative link technology suitable to support the FAA’s Data 

Communications Segment 3 requirements, including full four-dimensional trajectory-based operations 

(TBO), the L-band terrestrial en route communications system is also envisioned to support other future 

communications applications including mobile System Wide Information Management (SWIM) and 

unmanned aircraft system (UAS) safety-critical data communications, UAS command and control, and 

monitoring of UAS onboard sense-and-avoid and automation capabilities. 

This report is being provided as part of the NASA Glenn Contract NNC05CA85C Task 7: “New 

ATM Requirements—Future Communications, C-band and L-band Communications Standard 

Development.” Task 7 is separated into two distinct subtasks, each aligned with specific work elements 

and deliverable items identified in the FAA’s PLA and with the FAA FY09 spending plan for these 

subtasks. Subtask 7–1 addresses C-band airport surface data communications standard development tasks 

that define ConUse requirements and architecture, describe supporting system analyses, and test 

development and demonstration plans, establishing operational capability. 

The purpose of the subtask 7–2, and the subject of this report, is to define the L-band terrestrial 

ConUse, systems performance requirements and architecture (Deliverable 7–2A/B) in a future L-band 

(960 to 1164 MHz) air/ground (A/G) communication system referred to as L-band digital aeronautical 

communications system (L–DACS). The proposed L–DACS will be capable of providing ATM services, 

including the potential applications identified in the Aerospace Communications Systems Technical 

Support (ACSTS) Contract task 6, in continental airspace in the 2020+ timeframe. Task 7–2 also includes 

an initial L-band system safety and security risk assessment (Deliverable 7–2D), supports joint 

FAA/EUROCONTROL L–DACS development and evaluation, and presents inputs to design 
 NASA/CR—2010-216326 2 

specifications for L-band communications systems (subtask 7–E). Subtasks associated with interference 

analysis and testing were postponed due to FAA’s European partners schedule change. 

This report presents a combined deliverable for the subtasks 7–2 A, B, and E. The results of subtask 

7–2d containing the results of the preliminary safety and security risk assessment and mitigation are 

reported in a separate document. Subtask 7–2C—Compatibility and Interference Analysis Study—was 

deleted from both Phase I and II of the subtask 7 due to lack of availability of the L–DACS prototype 

during the period of performance of this task. 

1.2 System Overview 

Systems covered by this document provide A/G communications services in support of ATM and are 

shown within the dashed red box shown in Figure 1. On the ground, these systems typically consist of 

radio ground station subsystems, including radios, antennas, cabling, power systems, environmental 

systems, towers, monitoring and control (M&C) functionality, and other systems to provide A/G 

communications services; networking subsystems to provide ground/ground (G/G) communications 

service connectivity to end systems and users; and usually some centralized M&C functionality to 

monitor and control system operations and performance. Additionally, while this document is to support 

definition of FAA ground-based systems; this document also covers systems providing air/air (A/A) 

communications services. This is also included in Figure 1. 

Figure 1.—Communications systems covered by this ConUse document (slightly altered version 

of Figure 1–1 in Ref. 14). 

It should be noted that while the figure essentially illustrates A/A and A/G communications provided 

by the proposed L-band system, it includes air traffic service provider (ATSP) end-systems only. ATSP 

presents a subset of a broader air navigation service providers (ANSP) category that in addition to ATSP 

may encompass aeronautical information services providers, communication, navigation and surveillance 

providers, meteorological (office) service provider) and airport/aerodrome flight information service 

(AFIS) providers. 

Operator System Element Aircraft System Element

Air Traffic Service Provider (ATSP) System Element

Controller

Air Traffic Service Unit (ATSU)

Flight Crew

Ground – Ground

Communication

Communication

Services

Air - Ground

Communication

Procedures

(Flight Deck)

Procedures

(ATSU)

HumanMachine

Interface

Interface to

Communication

Services

End System

(ATSU)

Aircraft System Element

End System

(Aircraft)

HumanMachine

Interface

Interface to

Communication

Services

Air - Air

Communication
 NASA/CR—2010-216326 3 

1.3 Document Overview 

This document is organized as follows: 

 Section 1.0 provides background system information and includes document scope and 

organization. 

 Section 1.0 presents the ConUse and requirements development processes. 

 Section 3.0 is devoted to the ConUse of the proposed L–DACS. After describing the ConUse 

development process, it presents the operational need for the L–DACS by describing current A/G 

communications systems and their associated problems and capability shortfalls. New system 

justification shows potential benefits of new systems and description of the desired changes. A 

proposed system is then described. ConUse are presented referencing the RTCA NAS ConOps 

guidance documents and descriptions of FAA’s Data Communications Program (Data Comm) 

operational scenarios, NextGen operational concepts, L–DACS operational concepts based on 

flight domain, as well as those derived from the communications operating concept and 

requirements (COCR). 

 Section 4.0 presents L–DACS system requirements. It describes the system requirements 

development process and presents the results of the middle-out approach. 

 Section 5.0 describes the synthesis process and introduces L–DACS physical architecture. 

 Section 6.0 is devoted to the UAS describing their existing operations, the need for additional 

communication links, and L–DACS ConUse as applicable to the UAS. 

 Section 7.0 summarizes the preliminary inputs to L–DACS design specification. It includes an 

assessment of the potential L–DACS implementation and transition issues, outlines the long-term 

schedule for the FAA and EUROCONTROL, and notes various factors that affect the 

development process. An overview of the requirements definition process and the results of 

previous analyses provide inputs to the design specification. 

 Appendix A defines acronyms and abbreviations used in this report. 

 Appendix A summarizes RTCA NAS ConOps applicable to the proposed L–DACS. 

 Appendix C presents hierarchical diagrams of functional requirements. 

 Appendix D contains N2 diagrams illustrating L–DACS functional requirements. 

 Appendix E describes spectrum requirements for UAS communications. 

 Appendix F discusses spectrum applicability for UAS applications. 
 NASA/CR—2010-216326 4 

2.0 ConUse and Requirements Development Processes 

ConUse are part of a hierarchy of concepts documents that capture concepts related to the NAS. As 

defined in the FAA’s NAS System Engineering Manual (SEM), there are two general types of concepts 

documents associated with system engineering in the NAS: ConOps and ConUse. A ConOps is “a 

description of what is expected from the system, including its various modes of operation and timecritical parameters,” whereas a ConUse is “an extension of a higher level ConOps with an emphasis on a 

particular NAS system and its operating environment.” (Ref. 8). Figure 2 depicts the three hierarchical 

levels of concept documents typically used in the NAS and defined in the SEM: two levels of ConOps 

and the ConUse. 

Figure 2.—National Airspace System (NAS) engineering concept document hierarchy (Ref. 8). 

Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. 

 
 NASA/CR—2010-216326 5 

These three levels can be summarized as follows (from Ref. 8): 

 NAS-level ConOps are a high-level narrative of the user community’s desired change with some 

performance indicators. The document indicates from the user’s perspective the desired end-state 

for respective systems in the NAS. It often uses various operational scenarios to illustrate the 

desired operational concept. 

 Service-level ConOps provide conceptual insight into a particular service of the NAS. It gives 

more detail and in-depth information about the desired operations within the service. 

 ConUse are extensions of the NAS-level ConOps and a particular service-level ConOps, with an 

emphasis on a particular NAS system and its operating environment. It is more detailed and 

substantial, but it is still expresses the user’s needs regarding a specific system within the NAS. 

NAS-level and similar level international ConOps driving this ConUse and its associated 

requirements include the RTCA’s “National Airspace System: Concept of Operations and Vision for the 

Future of Aviation” (Ref. 1), the “Concept of Operations (ConOps) for the Next Generation Air 

Transportation System (NextGen)” (Ref. 2), and the ICAO’s “Global ATM Operational Concept 

Document” (Ref. 3). At the next lower layer, EUROCONTROL’s “Operating Concept of the Mobile 

Aviation Communication Infrastructure Supporting ATM beyond 2015” (Ref. 4) was used with the 

service-level ConOps—Future Communications Study (FCS) Communications Operating Concept and 

Requirements (COCR) (Ref. 5)—to provide reference guidance for A/G and A/A communications 

services operating concepts and requirements directly applicable to this ConUse. On a similar level to this 

ConUse, but with a different scope and intended for different services, are the operating concepts and 

requirements presented in “Data Communications Safety and Performance Requirements” (Ref. 6) and 

the FAA’s “Final Program Requirements (FPR) for Data Communications” (Ref. 7). 

The ConUse and performance requirements described in this document apply to a future aeronautical 

L-band (960 to 1164 MHz) communications system named the L-band Digital Aeronautical 

Communications System (L–DACS), providing services similar in scope to those described in the “FCI 

Aeronautical Data Services Definition Task Report” (Ref. 11). This follows from the previous FCS 

technology evaluation studies (Ref. 15) that identified two hybrid technologies (L–DACS1 and 

L–DACS2) as candidates for further development that best meet the FCS technology assessment criteria 

and that are designed for L-band spectrum as a recommended band for supporting new data link 

communications capabilities for continental airspace. 

Typically, concepts documents and requirements for new systems are developed for the NAS based 

on the process depicted in Figure 2, which illustrates the top-down iterative process and general 

relationships among concepts, requirements, and architectures. Because many, if not most, NAS systems 

are not new, but rather, evolutionary improvements of existing NAS systems, a top-down process is not 

always appropriate. Instead, a middle-out approach is taken. This is a combination of a top-down process, 

which takes into account new concepts and missions needs, and a bottom-up approach, which takes into 

account existing requirements and concepts. Figure 3 shows a middle-out approach was adopted for the 

concepts and requirements developed for L–DACS. As shown in the figure, operational concepts and 

requirements of higher-level concepts documents flow down to this document, providing high-level 

guidance and direction in the form of required functions and flows for the services of interest, namely 

A/G and A/A communications services. In addition to this top-down process, a bottom-up process of 

identifying and evaluating specific concepts and requirements developed for other communications 

systems, such as Data Comm, Next Generation Air/Ground Communication (NEXCOM), and 

Link2000+, along with appropriate NAS System Requirements (SR–1000), was employed for this 

document. The two sets of requirements were merged to provide a set of L–DACS high-level functional 

requirements. 
 NASA/CR—2010-216326 6 

Figure 3.—Requirements management process flow (Ref. 8). Acronyms are defined in Appendix A.
 NASA/CR—2010-216326 7 

Figure 4.—L–DACS ConUse and system requirements development flow chart. 

Acronyms are defined in Appendix A.

FAA OSED for the Future 

Comm. System

NextGen

ConOps

EUROCONTROL’s Operating 

Concept of the Mobile Aviation 

Comm, Infrastructure 

Supporting ATM beyond 2015

FAA Final Program 

Requirements for Data Comm.

RTCA NAS 

ConOps Vision 

for the Future 

of Aviation

COCR v2.0

Global ATM 

Operational 

Concept Document 

(ICAO 9854)

FAAData

Comm

Program 

Requirements

Functional Analysis: 

Identifying Specific Functions 

Necessary to Enable these 

Concepts of Use

COCR

V2.0

(Performance

Requirements)

ICAO 9869 RCP Manual

RTCA DO-264

RTCA DO-290

Other System/Service Level CONOPS/CONUSE

RTCA DO-304, Guidance 

Material for UAS

NAS Level CONOPS

NAS-SR 1000

System Requirements 

Bottom-up Assessment

Combined System 

Requirements

System Requirements 

Top-Down Assessment

ICAO/RTCA

A/G

SARPs/

MASPS

NEXCOM

SRD

CONUSE 

Development
NASA/CR—2010-216326 8 

3.0 Concepts of Use 

3.1 ConUse Development Process 

A process recommended in the NAS system engineering manual (SEM, Ref. 8) was used as a guide in 

developing ConUse for the proposed L–DACS. Figure 5 summarizes the steps. The following sections 

describe the findings for each of the steps shown in the figure. 

 

Figure 5.—ConUse development process. 

3.2 Operational Needs 

This section defines the operational needs for the L–DACS by describing current and planned A/G 

communications systems and their associated problems and capability shortfalls. Though not a current 

system at this time, the planned data communications networks services (DCNS) A/G data 

communications system being developed under the FAA’s Data Comm Program is discussed here 

because it is expected to be implemented before any L–DACS is implemented and should mitigate many 

of the current operational problems and shortcomings, while still leaving room for L–DACS to provide 

additional gains in overcoming current A/G communications problems and shortcomings. 

3.2.1 Current Air-to-Ground Communication System 

A good description of the FAA’s current analog A/G voice communications system used for air 

traffic control (ATC) can be found in the NEXCOM system requirement document (Ref. 9). 

The current A/G Communications System for ATC consists of voice-based networks that 

use DSB–AM radios and operate in the 117.975 to 137 Megahertz (MHz) VHF band for 

civil aircraft and the 225 to 400 MHz UHF band for military aircraft. The radios operate 

with the same frequency used for controller-to-pilot (uplink) and pilot-to-controller 

(downlink) transmissions in a simplex “push-to-talk” mode. There is a dedicated, noninterconnected radio network for each operational environment (En Route, Terminal, 

airport surface, and flight service). In the event of a control facility power loss, 

Identify Operational 

Need for a New 

System

• Describe Current 

A/G 

Communication 

System

• Current System 

Operational 

Environment

• Current System 

Objectives and 

Scope

• Current System 

Capability 

Shortfalls

• Constraints

Provide Proposed 

System Justification

• Potential 

Benefits of New 

Systems

• Operational 

Shortfalls 

Addressed by 

Data Comm

Program

• Description of 

Desired Change

• Change Priorities 

and Road Maps

• Assumptions and 

Constraints

Define Proposed 

System

• Objectives and 

Scope

• Proposed 

System in 

context of NAS 

EA Operational 

View

• System 

Description

• Operational 

Environment

• Frequency and 

Technology –

Environment, 

Requirements 

and Limitations

• Users

• Operational 

Policies and 

Constraints

Define CONUSE

• Use of the 

Proposed 

System per 

Flight Phase

• Data Link 

Messages 

Examples

• Operational 

Scenarios 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 9 

engine generators provide back-up power. In the event of equipment failure, A/G 

communications are provided by Backup Emergency Communications (BUEC) in the 

Enroute, Emergency Communications System (ECS) in the large TRACONS and 

portable transceivers in the smaller TRACONS and Air Traffic Control Towers (ATCT). 

The current A/G communications system architecture is roughly the same for all 

operational environments. The specific equipment used in the A/G communications 

string can differ among the various facilities. Different control facility types have 

different voice switches, with each type of switch having a unique interface. 

Figure 6 shows this system for en route A/G communications. Similar architectures are in place for 

terminal area and airport surface area A/G communications. A very good description of the current A/G 

voice communications architecture and facilities is provided in Appendix A of the NEXCOM system 

requirements document (Ref. 9). 

Figure 6.—Current en route air-to-ground (A/G) communications system (Ref. 9). Acronyms are defined in 

Appendix A. 

3.2.2 Current System Operational Environment 

According to the SEM (Ref. 8), the operational environment of a system consists of 

the conditions in which the mission or function is planned and carried out. Operational 

conditions are human-created conditions involving operations such as air traffic density, 

communication congestion, and workload. Part of the operational environment may be 

described by the type of operation (air traffic control, air carrier, general aviation); phase 

Stnby

Stnby

Stnby

Stnby

VHF Radio

DSB AM

Cockpit

Display

Management

Unit

Flight Data

Recorder

Voice

Recorder

AIRCRAF T

VHF R adio

DSB AM

Host

Computer

VSCS

Voice

Switch

DSR

(Controller’s 

Console)

Microphone

Speaker

Keyboard

Trackball

Display

Demarc

Demarc

Telcom

Network

Vo ice Control Combined Voice & Control

RCAG VHF Rx

DSB AM

Stnby

VHF Tx

DSB AM

Stnby

UHF Rx

DSB AM

Stnby

UH F Tx

DSB AM

Stnby

BU EC VHF Rx

DSB AM

VHF Tx

DSB AM

UHF Rx

DSB AM

U HF Tx

DSB AM

RCE

RC E

RCE

RCE

AR TCC

Modem

VHF Radio

DSB AM

Cockpit

Audi o

Cockpit

Radio Control

VHF Rx

DSB AM

Local R adios

VHF Tx

DSB AM

Analog Voice

DSB AM

U HF Rx

DSB AM

UHF 

DSB AM

Tx

RCE 

RCE 

Stnby

Stnby

Stnby

Stnby

VHF Radio

DSB AM

Cockpit

Display

Management

Unit

Flight Data

Recorder

Voice

Recorder

AIRCRAF T

VHF R adio

DSB AM

Host

Computer

VSCS

Voice

Switch

DSR

(Controller’s 

Console)

Microphone

Speaker

Keyboard

Trackball

Display

Demarc

Demarc

Telcom

Network

Vo ice Control Combined Voice & Control

RCAG VHF Rx

DSB AM

Stnby

VHF Tx

DSB AM

Stnby

UHF Rx

DSB AM

Stnby

UH F Tx

DSB AM

Stnby

BU EC VHF Rx

DSB AM

VHF Tx

DSB AM

UHF Rx

DSB AM

U HF Tx

DSB AM

RCE

RC E

RCE

RCE

AR TCC

Modem

VHF Radio

DSB AM

Cockpit

Audi o

Cockpit

Radio Control

VHF Rx

DSB AM

Local R adios

VHF Tx

DSB AM

Analog Voice

DSB AM

U HF Rx

DSB AM

UHF 

DSB AM

Tx

RCE 

RCE 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 10 

[of flight] (ground taxiing, takeoff, approach, en route, transoceanic, landing); or rules 

governing the operation (Instrument Flight Rules versus Visual Flight Rules). 

Rather than being a NAS service itself, G/G and A/G communications are enablers of NAS services 

and provides the following functionality (Ref. 16): 

Communications enables the NAS to exchange information with users, specialists, ATC 

facilities, and other Government agencies. Communications enables air traffic control 

operations within the NAS by employing appropriate technologies to exchange voice and 

data. This information is transported over land lines and wireless connectivity utilizing 

government and commercial assets. Communications defines how data is moved across 

the NAS to accomplish flight planning, control functions and navigation services for 

ground and space based systems. This enabler provides end-to-end service to pilots to 

include disseminating and coordinating the flight plan and defines how controllers 

provide service throughout the flight while coordinating with other facilities and 

government agencies. The communications enabler supports collaboration between users 

and specialists for traffic synchronization and flow services. Communications support the 

exchange of navigation and surveillance information across the NAS. Information 

includes electronic signals emanating from ILS, VOR and space based systems and 

aircraft transmitted beacon code data. 

Reference 17, which gives an as-is system view 2 (SV–2) of the NAS, describes how NAS interfaces, 

as identified in the NAS system view 1 (SV–1) (Ref. 18), are supported by physical media. 

Pertinent information about communications systems, communications links, and communications 

networks is presented as a pictorial view of system interactions and telecommunications service 

characteristics along with implementation technologies. Six as-is SV–2 views were developed depicting 

an overall telecommunications infrastructure and providing separate views for five information flow 

areas: 

 Surveillance 

 Weather 

 Command and control 

 Flight data 

 Aeronautical information 

An overview chart depicting an SV–2 telecommunications view and associated data for the command 

and control functional flow area is presented in Figure 7. 

Specifically, A/G communications is mainly used for communications between air traffic controllers 

or specialists on the ground and manned aircraft pilots to enable the following required NAS functions 

(Ref. 16):3

 Manage flight plans (plan flights) 

 Monitor aircraft status (monitor flights) 

 Control aircraft (control traffic) 

 Manage weather information (support flight operations) 

 Maintain NAS infrastructure (monitor NAS operations) 

 Plan traffic flow (plan NAS usage) 

 Assess traffic flow performance (plan NAS usage) 

 

3

In the listing the subfunction is shown, followed by the parent function in parentheses. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 11 

Figure 7.—System View 2 (SV–2) command and control detailed air-to-ground communications view for 2009 to 2010 

(Ref. 17). Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. 

For the most part, these functions are currently implemented in the NAS via voice communications, 

although NAS–SR–1000 (Ref. 16) includes requirements for some functions that explicitly designate data 

communications as the means of A/G communications and other requirements that do not specify the A/G 

communications type. The NAS functions listed earlier are needed to provide several of the NAS Service 

Capabilities defined in NAS–SR–1000. 

Table 1 provides a mapping of all NAS level functions to all the NAS service capabilities enabled by 

those functions. An “x” at a row-column intersection in the table indicates that the particular function in 

that row is needed to provide the NAS service capability in that column. Of particular interest for this 

report are the functions that can be enabled by A/G communications to provide specific NAS service 

capabilities. For example, A/G communications is used to implement some of the functionality needed to 

manage flight plans in support of the Flight Planning service capability. This A/G communicationsspecific mapping is indicated by the blue boxes in the table. Thus, as shown in the table, A/G 

communications is needed to support the following NAS service capabilities (denoted with blue boxes in 

the “Capability” heading row of the table): 

 Flight planning 

 Separation assurance 

 Advisory services 

 Traffic flow management 

 Emergency services 

 Infrastructure and information management 

 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 12 

Some of the NAS service capabilities listed earlier, such as separation assurance and A/G 

communications-enabled flight planning service capability, are considered to be safety critical for the 

NAS. Based on the need to support the NAS critical services, A/G voice communications latency and 

availability performance requirements are fairly stringent. Typically, this has resulted in requirements for 

0.99999 availability and an end-to-end latency of 250 msec4

 for the most critical voice communications 

services. 

For continental airspace, A/G voice communications is provided in the terminal maneuvering area 

(TMA), en route, and airport surface domains, with the current architecture as described in Section 3.2.1. 

Voice communications is used for all phases of flight, that is, from gate to gate. 

TABLE 1.—MAPPING AIR-TO-GROUND VOICE COMMUNICATIONS FUNCTIONS 

TO NATIONAL AIRSPACE SERVICE (NAS) SERVICE CAPABILITIES (REF. 16). 

 

4

 This performance value for end-to-end A/G voice communications latency was provided in earlier 

versions of NAS–SR–1000, but is not in current versions. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 13 

3.2.3 Current System Users 

The users of the current VHF A/G communications system include the following (Ref. 19): 

(1) Scheduled air transport carriers (including international, trunk, regional, commuter, and air 

freight carriers) 

(2) Nonscheduled air carriers 

(3) General aviation (GA) (including operators of turbine-powered and reciprocating-engine 

aircraft) 

(4) Operators of unpowered aircraft (including gliders and lighter-than-air aircraft) 

(5) Operators of various military aircraft 

(6) Operators of certain ground and maritime vehicles (e.g., airport service vehicles, those vehicles 

coordinating in a search-and-rescue mission) 

(7) ATS providers 

(8) Aeronautical operational control (AOC) service providers 

3.2.4 Current System Objectives and Scope 

The objectives of the current A/G communications system are consistent with the provisions of the 

NAS service capabilities and performance requirements listed in Section 3.2.2. Currently, they are 

characterized by “high availability, low end-to-end latencies, the ability to convey human feelings, 

flexibility of dialogue, provision of a party-line, and use for non-routine, time critical, or emergency 

situations” (Ref. 5). 

Some of these characteristics actually offer an advantage to voice communications as compared to 

data communications; however, there are several disadvantages of voice communications that motivate 

the need for data communications for many applications. 

The NextGen ConOps has summarized the current attributes (and associated constraints) of the voice 

based A/G communications system as follows (Ref. 2): 

 Limited data communications for ATM and operational control 

 Limited access to real-time weather and aeronautical data 

 Voice communications routine for ATM 

 Analog voice 

 Analog weather information display systems 

 A/G and G/G communications 

 Loss of communications due to beyond line-of-site (BLOS) aircraft position (e.g., over the ocean) 

 Individual ground systems for each information type brought to the flight deck 

 Point-to-point aircraft communications based on ATC sectors 

Currently continental A/G voice communications systems operate over the VHF and UHF 

aeronautical mobile (route) service (AM(R)S) frequency bands; the scope of operation is constrained to 

be radio line of sight, which dictates the need for networks of ground radio stations to provide 

radiofrequency (RF) coverage for the entire airspace volume for which the NAS service is to be provided. 

This is usually not a problem for A/G communications with manned aircraft. However, this offers a 

constraint to the routine operation in the NAS of UAS, which, when operating under a Certificate of 

Authorization providing it a special waiver for conducting a flight in the NAS, often operate in beyond 

line of sight conditions using non protected frequency bands (i.e., not AM(R)S or aeronautical mobile 

satellite (route) service (AMS(R)S frequency bands). Other operational constraints for UAS are described 

in Section 6.0. 

Figure 8 summarizes several principal shortcomings of the current A/G voice communications 

system, including lack of automation, limited or no data communications availability, aging 

infrastructure, technology limitations, and spectrum saturation. The resulting operational problems, if not 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 14 

addressed, could lead to service degradation and limit introduction of new or expanded services. These, in 

turn, could potentially compromise safety of operation and increase operating costs. 

Saturation of spectrum is highlighted in red as the problem specifically mitigated by the introduction 

of a new L-band system (L–DACS), whereas the other operational problems will likely be mitigated to a 

degree dependent on the particular technology implemented with the L–DACS. 

Figure 8.—Current National Airspace System air-to-ground communications operational problems. 

As the NAS evolves to achieve the JPDO and FAA’s NextGen vision and ConUse, many of the 

transformational services and planned operational improvements will be enabled via data 

communications. Unfortunately, the current A/G communications system lacks data communications 

capability for ATS. In moving towards NextGen, this shortcoming will become more acute and will lead 

to several significant shortfalls in safety, capacity, efficiency, and productivity. As part of the investment 

analysis process for Data Comm, a fairly comprehensive list of these shortfalls has been developed. These 

are repeated in Table 3 to specifically identify the shortfalls that the Data Comm intends to address. 

It is important to note that the Data Comm FPR document recognizes that “the scope of the mission 

shortfalls identified herein are broader than will be addressed solely by a data communications capability” 

(Ref. 7). Because of the limitations and constraints of implementing data communications using very high 

frequency digital link (VDL) Mode 2 over a congested aeronautical VHF band, the Data Comm will focus 

principally on implementing the most critical ATSs. This provides opportunities for L–DACS systems to 

augment data communications by enabling communications of less critical and essential ATSs to address 

the shortfalls listed in Table 2. 

 

Lack of

automation

Dependency on

human interface

Opportunities for errors.

Increased use of human resources

Safety may be

compromised.

Potential cost

increase.

Limited to no

data/info

availability on a

plane

Decisions made

on the ground

Potential for less than optimum

decisions being made.

Inefficient use of ground resources.

Safety may be

compromised.

Potential cost

increase.

Aging

infrastructure

Need for repairs.

Limited  introduction of new

applications

Safety may be

compromised.

Potential cost

increase.

Technology

limitations

Limited

introduction of

new services and

applications

Inefficient use of resources. Missed

opportunities to increase safety and

capacity

Safety may be

compromised.

Potential cost

increase.
NASA/CR—2010-216326 15 

TABLE 2.—CURRENT SHORTFALLS RELATED TO AIRPORT SURFACE AIR-TO-GROUND VOICE 

COMMUNICATIONS 

[From a subset of shortfalls described in Ref. 7] 

Safety shortfalls 

Peak communication workload demands on the radar controller take a larger portion of the controller’s available cognitive 

resources. 

Situations conducive to producing errors, confusion, and read-back and hear-back errors arising from voice congestion and voice

communication quality. 

Inability to implement a coherent “sector resource management” concept for the sector team where air/ground communication 

workload can be shared. 

Alternate means to enable air/ground communication support for contingency plans when the primary voice communication 

capability is not available. For example, when a catastrophic event results in the loss of air/ground voice communication at an air 

route traffic control center (ARTCC) or during transient events such as a “stuck microphone” in the cockpit. 

Capacity shortfalls 

The capability to rapidly and accurately communicate complex clearances containing multiple latitude/longitude-defined route 

elements, such as those associated with high-altitude airspace design; arrival and approach procedure names; and, speed, altitude, 

and heading instructions and preferences.

The ability to more effectively manage inter- and intra-facility sector air/ground voice communication transfer. 

The ability to efficiently communicate air traffic instructions such as altimeter settings and aircraft beacon codes. 

The ability to disseminate efficiently, airspace congestion and weather advisories; and NAS infrastructure status information. 

The ability to efficiently communicate complete departure clearances and revisions necessitated by traffic management 

initiatives. 

The ability to provide for the maximum efficient use of the airspace and strategic plans by adjusting individual flights to reduce 

contention for resources and assure no resource is allowed to remain idle in the face of demand. 

Limited ability to use four-dimensional trajectories associated with flight objects and the airspace plan to identify areas of 

congestion, and the potential need for flow control initiatives to mitigate severe congestion. 

Efficiency and productivity shortfalls 

Lack of the ability to support airspace user operational requirements, utility, performance, and other flight operations 

preferences. Avionics and airframe manufacturers need consistent global communication capabilities requirements. 

Lack of the ability to exchange user preferred trajectories in real time. There are limited decision support tools to communicate 

and ensure user preferred routing, integrated sequencing, and spacing of arrivals and departures in Terminal Radar Approach 

Control (TRACON) airspace. 

Absence of synchronization between on-board avionics, such as Flight Management Systems, with ground Flight Data 

Processing Systems. Lack of synchronization between airborne and ground-based ATC increases controller and flight crew 

workload, imposes additional communications requirements, and introduces risks of operational errors and incidents. Providing 

for synchronization between aircraft flight management systems and ground-based ATC data processing systems provides 

increased predictability for flights and will allow aircraft operators to reduce costs, optimize flight routes, improve utility, and 

reduce dependency on voice communications. 

Misaligned communications infrastructure and service delivery to meet anticipated growth in the number of sectors and areas of 

specialization that must be supported for a given airspace combined with the high cost for hiring additional/maintaining current 

controller staff, leads to smaller and smaller sectors thus increasing flight crew/controller workloads and increased cost. 

Currently, air/ground communication capabilities are not integrated with other aspects of the automation environment. 

Instructions to and requests from airspace users must be independently exchanged via voice air/ground communications and then 

manually updated in automation systems such as the flight data processor leading to system errors and less efficient movement of 

aircraft through the airspace. 

Inability to handle multiple, simultaneous traffic management initiated trajectory changes is limited to single voice transmissions 

that are prone to miscommunications and may lead to system errors. 

Inability to automate many repetitive and time-consuming tasks precludes labor resources from focusing on more productive 

tasks. 

The current communication system lacks the capabilities inherent in modern, network-based communications and therefore 

limits more efficient dynamic resource management. 

Even though each of the shortfalls listed are meant to be addressed to some extent by the Data Comm 

sing VDL Mode 2, there are opportunities to overcome these shortfalls to even a greater extent during the 

later program segments of Data Comm (e.g., late Segment 2 and Segment 3) using link technologies such 

as L–DACS with greater bandwidth capabilities, which could augment the benefits already attained 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 16 

through the earlier VDL Mode 2 Data Comm program segment implementations (i.e., Segments 1 and 2) 

by providing a broader scope of services. 

In addition to the shortfalls described in Table 3, there are significant operational and technical 

shortfalls in the ability of the current A/G communications system to meet the needs of UAS operating in 

the NAS. Further discussion of shortfalls related to UAS operations in the NAS is provided in Section 6. 

3.3 New Airport Surface Communications Systems Justification 

3.3.1 Potential Benefits of New Airport Surface Communications Systems 

The NextGen ConOps states that “[t]ransformation of the ATM system in NextGen is necessary 

because of the inherent limitations of today’s system, including limits driven by human cognitive 

processes and verbal communications” (Ref. 2). Likewise, the joint EUROCONTROL/FAA FCS 

conducted for AP–17 concluded that “in the longer term, a paradigm shift will occur in the operating 

concept and the prime mode of communication exchanges will be based in data exchanges rather than 

voice communications as it is today” (Ref. 20). 

The following excerpts (Ref. 2) from JDPO’s NextGen ConOps comprehensively describe the 

NextGen A/G network services. They are repeated here because they effectively communicate the full 

envisioned scope, benefits, and advantages of these services and the importance of data communications 

in enabling them: 

With the transformed role of the flight crew and flight deck in NextGen, data 

communications are critical to ensuring that data is available for flight deck automation 

(i.e., avionics to support flight crew decision making). ... Data communications are also 

needed to provide real-time data to the ANSP on the operational aspects of flights. In 

certain defined airspace, data communications are the primary means of communicating 

clearances, routine communications, and 4DT agreements between the ANSP and flight 

deck. ... Voice communications are used to supplement data communications for tactical 

situations and for emergencies to augment procedural responses or risk mitigations. 

Voice communications are used to communicate with lesser-equipped aircraft in 

appropriate airspace. ... 

One of the key transformations is that air-ground voice communications are no longer 

limited by the assigned frequency-to-airspace sector mapping. This allows greater 

flexibility for developing and using airspace/traffic assignments in all airspace. 

Communications paths, including both voice and data, are controlled by an intelligent 

network. Communications between the ANSP and the flight deck are established when 

the flight is activated and are maintained continuously and seamlessly. This capability is 

linked to the flight data management function so that the system automatically manages 

who has authority to interact with the flight deck based on the type of agreement being 

negotiated or information being exchanged. Labor-intensive transfers of control and 

communication are automated. Data and voice communications are automatically 

transferred in the flight deck as the aircraft moves between ANSPs. 

Data communications are central to TBO [(trajectory based operations)], including the 

use of 4DTs (pushback and taxi inclusive) for planning and execution on the surface, 

automated trajectory analysis and separation assurance, and aircraft separation assurance 

applications that require flight crew situational awareness of the 4DTs and short-term 

intent of surrounding aircraft. 

In addition, as indicated above, there is increased sharing of improved common data 

between the flight deck, operator, and ANSP. In classic airspace where data 

communications will be available but not required, information exchange can take place 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 17 

with data communications for participating aircraft to provide an operational advantage. 

Common data includes ATC clearances, current and forecast weather, hazardous weather 

warnings, notices to airmen (NOTAMs), updated charts, current charting, special aircraft 

data, and other required data. Data communications also include weather observations 

made by the aircraft that are automatically provided to ANSPs, weather service 

providers, and flight operators for inclusion in weather analysis and forecasts. Each of 

these data communications functions are managed by required communications 

performance (RCP) standards. 

The trend toward 2015 and beyond features a decreasing use of voice, with data becoming the 

primary communication link. This is shown in Table 3, which illustrates a projected allocation between 

voice and data communications during this period. As suggested by the table, for the en route domain, 

data link would become the primary means for most of the exchanges, with voice communication used for 

emergency messages and tactical clearances. In the TMA domain and on the airport surface, voice would 

remain the primary mode of communications for low delay and high availability pilot-ATC exchanges, 

with a data link used as a primary service for other messages and data-intensive services such as graphical 

weather. In all domains, voice communication would remain a backup for any data service. 

TABLE 3.—COMMUNICATION ALLOCATION BETWEEN VOICE AND DATA LINK (D/L) 

[Information from Ref. 4.] 

 Pilot-controller dialog Pilotpilot 

dialog 

Flight 

information 

exchange 

ATM 

exchange 

Information 

broadcast 

Air-air 

surveillance Emergency 

messages 

Tactical 

clearances 

Strategic 

clearances 

Information 

messages 

En route Voice 

D/L 

Voice 

D/La

Voice 

D/L 

Voice 

D/L 

Voiceb

D/L

Voice 

D/L

Voice 

D/L

Voice 

D/L D/L

TMAs Voice 

D/L

Voice 

D/L

Voice 

D/L 

Voice 

D/L 

Voice b

D/L

Voice 

D/L

Voice 

D/L

Voice 

D/L D/L

Airport 

surface 

Voice 

D/L

Voice 

Some D/L 

Voice 

&D/L 

Voice 

D/L 

Voice 

D/L 

Voice* 

D/L

Voice 

D/L

Voice 

D/L

Voice 

D/L D/L

Legend: 

 Red – Primary 

 Blue – Backup a

In 2015, en route operational concept is purely strategic. Then, tactical data exchanges are to be used as backup either to voice or 

to strategic data clearance service. 

b

No specific requirements identified except current Traffic Information Broadcast by Aircraft (TBA) procedure. 

Although a gradual introduction of data communications to the existing VHF systems should 

accommodate capacity requirements in the near term to midterm, additional spectrum is required to 

provide enough capacity to satisfy a growing demand for data communications in the far term. An 

L–DACS built to augment VHF voice and data communications systems already in place, including those 

implemented as part of the Data Comm, would increase overall communications system capacity, thus 

relieving congestion and allowing for introduction of additional services. Because of spectrum constraints 

in the aeronautical L-band, L–DACS should be built as a broadband system, potentially accommodating a 

wide array of applications and services that would otherwise be difficult, inefficient, or even impossible 

to implement. 

The congestion in a heavily utilized VHF band is more prevalent in Europe, where the 8.33-kHz 

channelization has already been introduced. Thus, an L–DACS rollout is expected in Europe prior to the 

United States. In the United States, frequency management options, such as the use of 8.33-kHz channel 

spacing, may be considered prior to the introduction of an L-band system. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 18 

3.3.2 Operational Shortfalls Addressed by Data Comm 

The FAA intends for Data Comm to significantly mitigate the safety, capacity, efficiency, and 

productivity shortfalls described in Table 2. It is anticipated that Data Comm will support the following 

improvements in airspace use and capacity (Ref. 7): 

 Improved airspace use and capacity 

 A more efficient A/G information and clearances exchange mechanism 

 An additional means of communication between flight crews and controllers 

 Reduced congestion on the voice channels 

 Reduced operational errors and flight crew deviations resulting from misunderstood clearances 

and read-back errors 

 Trajectory-based operations 

 Reduced controller and flight crew workload. 

Data Comm is planned to be implemented in three segments (Ref. 7, see Figure 9): 

 The first segment will facilitate data communications deployment and introduce initial four 

dimensional (4–D); latitude, longitude, altitude, and time) routes. 

 The second segment will introduce conformance management and initial 4–D agreements. 

 The third segment will expand 4–D agreements and provide an operational environment that 

allows the transfer of some separation assurance tasks from the ground to the air. 

An L–DACS implementation in the United States might follow or overlap Segment 2 (VDL Mode 2 

implementation) and enable additional services and operational capabilities not covered by VDL Mode 2 

for Data Comm.5

 Figure 9 depicts the planned capabilities for Data Comm, and for comparison also 

includes the European planned deployment of data communications capabilities. Those operational 

capabilities and the associated services shown in the figure for Segment 3, for example, the services 

needed to provide widespread 4–D agreements and widespread delegated separation, might benefit from a 

higher performance technology implementation like L–DACS. In addition to potentially augmenting the 

critical data communications services provided by VDL Mode 2 for Data Comm, L–DACS also could 

enable new noncritical services and UAS communications services. 

 

5

 An L–DACS could be a candidate communications technology for Segment 3 of Data Comm if capacity 

limits in the VHF band are exceeded earlier than currently anticipated in that program. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 19 

Figure 9.—Operational capabilities of Data Comm (Ref. 21). Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. 

3.3.3 Description of Desired Changes 

Data Comm will provide data communications as an enhancement to and potential replacement of 

A/G voice communications as the primary A/G link in an ATC operational environment. This additional 

mode of communications will contribute to improvements in airspace use and capacity. An L–DACS 

could further reduce congestion on VHF voice channels and increase A/G communications capacity by 

offering spectrum for additional services not offered by Data Comm. In addition, L–DACS offers a viable 

alternative for the implementation of one or more of the communications links for UAS communications, 

command/control, and/or sense-and-avoid systems. With Data Comm and L–DACS, the overall A/G 

information exchange could become more dynamic and efficient, potentially reducing operational errors 

and improving safety. 

The L–DACS is not proposed to replace any current systems or services; rather, it is proposed to 

augment them. Furthermore, it is assumed that the critical services proposed for implementation by the 

Data Comm program as an addition and/or replacement of voice communication will be in place by the 

time an L–DACS is implemented. 

The proposed L–DACS is being designed to limit interference to the existing services and operations 

in the L-band. No operational changes are expected for the L-band incumbent systems. 

3.3.4 Change Priorities and Roadmaps 

Figure 10 demonstrates how the L-band system development fits into the FCS proposed 

communications evolutional roadmap for European and U.S. ATM (as envisioned in 2007). 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 20 

Figure 10.—Evolution overview of aeronautical mobile communications (Ref. 20; note that this schedule is subject to 

change). Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. 

Figure 11 depicts the proposed L-band (and C-band) communications systems far-term strategy as 

part of the NAS Enterprise Architecture Communication Infrastructure Roadmap. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 21 

Figure 11.—Federal Aviation Administration communications roadmap (Ref. 22). Acronyms are defined in 

Appendix A. 

Figure 12 shows the proposed timeline for the expedited development and deployment of an L–DACS 

in Europe. 

Figure 12.—Target plan for expedited L–DACS development and deployment in Europe (November 2007) (Ref. 20). 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 22 

3.3.5 Assumptions and Constraints for L–DACS 

Assumptions and constraints for this document follow: 

 The proposed L–DACS is assumed to provide an increase in overall A/G communications 

systems capacity by utilizing the new spectrum (i.e., not VHF). 

 As noted earlier, the scope of this ConUse and requirements document includes A/G and A/A 

communications. 

 L–DACS will be designed specifically for data communication. When finalized, the technology 

may support voice communications, but this feature is not considered a system requirement at this 

time. 

 As noted earlier, this document assumes that the data communications system developed as part 

of Data Comm will precede an L–DACS implementation and deployment. 

 Although some critical services are proposed, the L–DACS will also target noncritical services, 

such as weather advisory and aeronautical information services implemented as part of an 

airborne SWIM program. It will also target one or more UAS communications services. 

 Although the L–DACS ConUse and functional requirements developed for the document are 

largely technology independent, services selection and overall system requirements may change if 

and when additional or different data is available from proposed L–DACS interference testing 

and as a result of a final selection of one of the two L–DACS technologies under consideration as 

of the time of this report. 

 L–DACS is to be designed and implemented in a manner that will not disrupt other existing 

services operating in the L-band. Additional interference research and testing will determine if 

any operational constraints are to be imposed, such as limiting the number of users, the time of 

the day, duration, and other parameters. 

Economic feasibility of an L–DACS, from the perspective of the ground infrastructure provider, was 

evaluated at a top level during the FCS Phase II project (Ref. 23) based on the results of the earlier 

technology prescreening (FCS Phase I). The initial economic analysis that was conducted showed that a 

positive business case for an L-band system implementation could be achieved with a payback period of 

4 years (Ref. 4). However, while the first order of magnitude cost estimate yielded positive results, the 

assumptions made during the analysis should be revisited at a later stage, when more details of a planned 

implementation are known. The analysis assumptions included consideration of coverage, system 

requirements, research and development, and operations and maintenance costs. 

3.4 Proposed L–DACS System 

3.4.1 Objectives and Scope 

Consistent with the need to overcome the specific current communications systems problems and 

shortfalls discussed earlier, two additional primary drivers for a future radio system (FRS) are (1) to 

provide an appropriate communications infrastructure to support future air traffic growth and (2) to 

provide a consistent global solution to support the goal of seamless air traffic management (Ref. 5). 

Accordingly, the proposed L–DACS component of the FRS aims to expand data communications 

capacity while being developed as a collaborative effort of the U.S. and European partners. 

The proposed system will be designed and implemented to meet FAA objectives defined in the FAA 

NextGen solution sets. For example, the collaborative air traffic management (CATM) solution set 

focuses on delivering services to accommodate flight operator preferences to the maximum extent 

possible. One of the required capabilities of this set is providing real on-demand NAS information—time 

access to NAS status (operational improvement (OI) 103305). 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 23 

Although it is noted as a midterm OI (Ref. 25), this currently identified opportunity is applicable to 

the proposed L-band system, and could be implemented as part of airborne SWIM. It is described as 

follows: 

Solution Set: Improve Collaborative Air Traffic Management 

Capability: 103305—On-Demand NAS Information 

IOC: 2013–2018 

Description: National Airspace System (NAS) and aeronautical information will be available to users on 

demand. NAS and aeronautical information is consistent across applications and locations, 

and available to authorized subscribers and equipped aircraft. Proprietary and security 

sensitive information is not shared with unauthorized agencies/individuals. 

3.4.2 Proposed System Description 

3.4.2.1 L–DACS as Part of the NextGen System 

Figure 13 illustrates the proposed NextGen operational view 1 (OV–1) in 2025. 

Figure 13.—Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) operational view in 2025 (Ref. 26) Acronyms are 

defined in Appendix A. 

L–DACS will be introduced as part of the proposed NextGen vision and will address continental 

en route and TMA airspace A/G communications. 

The proposed L–DACS will provide supplemental means to the ATC communications required by the 

operating rules (e.g., VHF voice communications) in continental airspace and will adhere to the data link 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 24 

characteristics noted in “Safety and Performance Requirements Standard for Air Traffic Data Link 

Services in Continental Airspace (Continental SPR Standard)” (Ref. 14). 

3.4.2.2 Proposed Operational Environment 

Along with the “as-is” SV–2 views of the NAS developed by the FAA Air Traffic Organization 

(ATO) planning organization, were a series of different “to be” views providing separate views for the 

five information flow areas for the 2025 timeframe. Figure 14 presents a 2025 service view for the 

command-and-control function for the proposed NAS. 
Figure 14.—System view 2 (SV–2) 2025 communications description: command and control (Ref. 27). Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. 

NASA/CR—2010-216326 25 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 26 

As noted in the NextGen ConOps (Ref. 2): 

In the NextGen timeframe, demand for air transportation and other airspace services is 

expected to grow significantly from today’s levels in terms of passenger volume, amount 

of cargo shipped, and overall number of flights. With respect to air traffic, changes will 

occur not only in the number of flights but also in the characteristics of those flights. 

Figure 15 illustrates some of the potential variations in demand characteristics. 

Figure 15.—Range of features in the NextGen system (Ref. 2). 

In NextGen, aircraft are expected to have a wider range of capabilities than today and 

support varying levels of total system performance via onboard capabilities and 

associated crew training. Many aircraft will have the ability to perform airborne selfseparation, spacing, and merging tasks and precisely navigate and execute 4DTs. Along 

with navigation accuracy, aircraft will have varying levels of cooperative surveillance 

performance via transmission and receipt of cooperative surveillance information, as well 

as the ability to observe and share weather information. In terms of flight operational 

performance, a wider range of capabilities regarding cruise speed, cruise altitudes, turn 

rates, climb and descent rates, stall speeds, noise, and emissions will exist. Aircraft 

without a resident pilot (e.g., UASs) will operate among traditional manned, piloted 

aircraft, and domestic supersonic cruise operations will also be more prevalent. 

Aircraft operators are also expected to have a diverse range of capabilities and operating 

modes. Many operators will have sophisticated flight planning and fleet planning 

capabilities to manage their operations. Operating modes include all of today’s modes, 

such as traditional hub/spoke operations, point-to-point flights, military/civil training, 

and recreational flying. Operational demand may vary among highly structured flights 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 27 

(e.g., today’s air carrier, cargo, or operators), irregularly scheduled flights with frequent 

trips to regular destinations with variable dates and times (e.g., air taxi operators or 

business operators with regular customers), and unscheduled, itinerant flights driven by 

individual events (e.g., lifeguard flights, personal trips, or law enforcement missions). In 

addition, new types of operations are expected, including UASs that perform a wide 

variety of missions (e.g., sensor platforms and cargo delivery) and more frequent 

commercial space vehicle operations (e.g., suborbital flights to low-earth-orbit payload 

delivery and return missions). Commercial space transport operations are also expected 

to grow overall, increasing pressures to efficiently balance competing needs for airspace 

access and efficiency. 

Overall, NextGen is expected to accommodate up to three times today’s traffic levels 

with broader aircraft performance envelopes and more operators operating within the 

same airspace, increasing the complexity and coordination requirements when ATM is 

required. 

Figure 16 depicts characteristics of the proposed NextGen support environment. 

Figure 16.—Proposed NextGen support environment. 

3.4.3 Frequency and Technology—Environment, Requirements, and Limitations 

While the aeronautical L-band spectrum (960 to 1164 MHz) is identified as appropriate for 

supporting a new data link communication capability, limitations associated with the use of this spectrum 

band should be recognized and accounted for. 

One of the big advantages of the L-band is a potentially large spectral region to support future 

broadband aeronautical communication services. At the same time, “it is a challenging environment for 

aeronautical communications due to the aeronautical channel characteristics and the current usage of the 

band” (Ref. 17). These challenges include the following noted in the AP–17 Future Communications 

Study (FCS): ”Estimated RMS delay spreads for this channel, on the order of 1.4 μs, can lead to 

frequency selective fading performance for some technologies. Interference to and from existing 

aeronautical L-band systems for a proposed communication technology requires detailed examination, 

including validation measurements and testing.” (Ref. 20). 

Proposed

support

environment

Spectrum

Addition in the

US and Europe

Introduciton of

Satellite

Navigation

Collaborative

Operations with

More Decisions

Made in Air

Digital Non‐

voice

Communications

and Advanced

Data Exchange
NASA/CR—2010-216326 28 

The AP–17 FCS further concluded (Ref. 20) 

The aeronautical L-band spectrum provides an opportunity to support the objectives for a 

future global communication system; however no technology evaluated for the Future 

Communication System (as defined) for supporting data communication in this band 

fully addresses all requirements and limitations of the operating environment. 

 Initial co-channel interference testing indicates potential interference of 

evaluated candidate technology waveforms to existing navigation systems. 

Further evaluation, including consideration of duty cycle effects on interference, 

is required to determine collocation feasibility (with on-tune channels, off-tune 

channels or cleared spectrum). 

 Each technology was identified as having some technical, cost or risk concerns 

that require modification of the technology specification for applicability and/or 

willingness to assume moderate levels of cost/risk. 

 Due to unique requirements, a technology adapted from existing standards 

wherever possible is recommended for this band. 

Desirable features for an aeronautical L-band technology include 

 Existing standard for safety application with some validation work performed 

(reducing time for standardization, increasing TRL, and reducing risk of 

certification) 

 Multi-carrier modulation (power efficient modulation for the aeronautical L-band 

fading environment) 

 Low duty cycle waveform with narrow-to-broadband channels (more likely to 

achieve successful compatibility with legacy L-band systems without clearing 

spectrum) 

 Adaptable/scalable features (improving flexibility in deployment and 

implementation, and adaptability to accommodate future demands) 

 Native mobility management and native IP interface (increasing flexibility and 

providing critical upper layer compatibility with worldwide data networking 

standards) 

These conclusions help to drive the L–DACS ConUse and system requirements presented in this 

report. 

Indepth studies conducted to support the technology evaluation process resulted in the 

recommendation of two alternative L–DACS technologies that provided all the desirable features listed 

above and could support a standardization effort, potentially reducing cost and risk. Table 4 shows the 

proposed technology options for the L–DACS. 

TABLE 4.—L–DACS OPTIONS KEY CHARACTERISTICS (REF. 20) 

[Acronyms are defined in Appendix A.] 

L–DACS 

Options 

Access scheme Modulation type Proposed technologies 

LDACS1 Frequency division duplex (FDD) Orthogonal frequency division multiplexing 

(OFDM) 

B–AMC and TIA–902 (P34)

LDACS2 Time division duplex (TDD) Continuous phase frequency shift keying 

(CPFSK)/GMSK type 

LDL and AMACS 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 29 

Follow-on FCS activities will further characterize and evaluate the proposed technology solutions, 

validate performance, and lead to a single L–DACS technology recommendation. 

3.4.4 User Impact 

Users of the system will include service providers and airspace users of A/G communications: 

 Safety and regularity of flight component 

o Air traffic controllers on the ground and flight crews in the air 

o UASs 

 Commercial data transfer related to airline operations and provisions of services to passengers—

addressed by service providers on the ground and flight crews and passengers in the air 

Both civil and military users will utilize the system as related to the services offered. Growing 

requirements to use UAS in civilian airspace using AM(R)S and AMS(R)S frequency allocations adds a 

new layer of requirements and adds different type of users to an aeronautical system. 

The introduction of an L-band system is expected to increase communications system capacity, thus 

allowing the addition of new services and expanding the user base. Figure 17 illustrates the effect of new 

system addition on the user base. 

It should be noted that the relationship between the capacity demand and changes in the user base are 

viewed as a cycle of events. The proposed introduction of an L-band system will increase the overall 

capacity of the system and open up opportunities for addition of data services not provided under the Data 

Comm. Many of those, most notably services associated with the Airborne SWIM program, will provide 

for the wider system use. Not only more users would be expected to take advantage of the new data 

communications capabilities, the types of users allowed to participate will change as well. 

Figure 17.—Communication system capacity demand and user base changes. 

As more data services are introduced and become part of day-to-day operations, the demand for 

additional services, and therefore capacity, is expected to grow. An introduction of a new frequency band, 

such as an L-band, in addition to the VHF frequencies supporting the existing voice and data 

communications services, will alleviate long-term capacity problems. 

 The expanded use of advanced technologies in general and L–DACS in particular, along with 

increased capacity, is expected to improve aviation safety and enhance operational efficiency for NAS 

users. The continued migration from a NAS based on a ground infrastructure and voice communication to 

a system that encompasses both ground and airborne components and utilizes the exchange of digital data 

as the primary type of communication, will “support the human in doing what they do best—choosing 

alternatives and making decisions, while the technology accomplishes what it can do best—the 

acquisition, compilation, evaluation and exchange of information” (Ref. 2). 

Introduction

of new

services

Wider user

base

Change in

type and

number of

users

Need for

more data

services

Increased

system

capacity
NASA/CR—2010-216326 30 

NextGen communications systems will enable users to play a more active role in each of the NAS 

service areas: 

 NAS management (strategic flow and resource management): SWIM capability will enable 

stakeholders’ access to relevant information. Users will become key participants in the planning 

of traffic flow management and will utilize a comprehensive information exchange process to 

improve flight operations planning according to capacity and traffic conditions to minimize 

congestion and delays. 

 Flight planning and emergency alerting services: Users will have interactive flight planning 

capabilities with an immediate access to real-time data. User-preferred routing will become 

available to properly equipped aircraft for both domestic and international flights. 

 Surface operations: Increased data-exchange capabilities will provide more users at more airports 

with flight clearances, airports information, positions of other aircraft, taxi routes, and weather 

conditions (current, forecast, hazardous). Users will have improved real-time planning with 

continuous update of the flight profile. 

 Arrival/departure and en route: A/G data exchange will enable more active flight deck 

participation in the decisionmaking process. Users will utilize data, such as ATC clearances, 

current and forecast weather, notices to airmen and hazardous weather warnings, updated charts, 

current weather, special use airspace status, and other required data. 

 Oceanic: A/G communication via L–DACS will not be provided in oceanic airspace. 

3.4.5 Operational Policies and Constraints 

Operational aspects of aeronautical communications are changing with an increased emphasis on 

safety and cost reduction achieved via increased automation, efficiency, delays reduction, and other 

improvements. 

General issues such as cost, spectrum availability, technology choice, and standards development, as 

well as logistics of system rollout will all influence operational policies and constraints. 

The NextGen ConOps document details operational policy issues that would affect the NextGen 

system. To support the proposed L–DACS development and implementation, policies need to be 

developed in the following areas: 

 International and domestic regulations 

 Safety management standards 

 Processes to streamline certification and reduce costs for aircraft and ground equipment 

 Privacy and liability legal concerns related to information sharing 

 Communications priority and congestion relief (e.g., market-driven vs. aircraft type) 

 Government role versus private sector role 

 Financing and maintenance responsibilities 

3.5 L–DACS Concepts of Use 

3.5.1 RTCA National Airspace System Concepts of Operations Guidance 

As noted in Section 2, the L–DACS ConUse were defined based on guidance and information 

provided by several higher order ConOps. A key NAS ConOps source driving the L–DACS ConUse is 

the RTCA NAS ConOps (Ref. 1). Appendix A presents a comprehensive listing derived from the RTCA 

NAS ConOps of future communications concepts to enable transfer of the following NAS information 

types: 

 Surveillance 

 Weather 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 31 

 Flight planning 

 Aeronautical information 

 Resource management 

3.5.2 Data Comm Operational Scenarios 

Operational scenarios can illustrate how proposed system capabilities could be used in an operational 

environment. The scenarios can demonstrate how the services offered by the new communications system 

could help to 

 Minimize operational errors, including those resulting from misunderstood instructions and readback errors 

 Improve efficiency 

 Provide further automation of traffic control 

 Enable more decisions made off the ground 

The Data Comm FPR provides an extensive listing of operational scenarios envisioned to be enabled 

by the data communications system. These scenarios also would be generally applicable to an L–DACS, 

implementation. 

3.5.3 Proposed Services 

3.5.3.1 Air Traffic Services 

Reference 11 classifies all of the COCR ATS data services as safety critical. It further identifies 

services that are not planned to be implemented by Data Comm through Segment 3, and identifies them as 

possible candidates for implementation via C-band and/or L-DACS. It must be stressed that both C-band 

and L–DACS are being developed for the future communications infrastructure to accommodate safety 

and regularity of flight services. These are designed to operate over aviation protected spectrum, so any 

COCR ATS service could be allowed to be implemented via one or the other of these links (as appropriate). 

As described earlier, this document focuses on the COCR ATS data services that are not expected to 

be provided by Data Comm through Segment 3, proposed as candidates for L–DACS as listed below. 

 Flight information services 

– Data link operational route information service (D–ORIS) 

– Data link operational terminal information service (D–OTIS) 

– Data link surface information and guidance (D–SIG) 

– Data link runway visual range (D–RVR) while airborne 

– Wake vortex (WAKE) 

– Flight plan consistency (FLIPCY) 

– System access parameter (SAP) 

– Pilot preferences downlink (PPD) 

 Weather advisory service 

– Data link significant meteorological information (D–SIGMET) 

 Advisory service 

– Dynamic route availability (DYNAV) 

 Emergency information service 

– Urgent contact (URCO), if in conjunction with other more routine services 

 A/A service 

– Air-to-air self separation (AIRSEP) 

 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 32 

COCR (Ref. 2) contains the description of the above services. Additional data services that may be 

provided via L–DACS could be identified as NextGen and SESAR progress. 

3.5.3.2 Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Suitable Services 

Services specific to the operation of UAS in the NAS and potentially suitable for implementation via 

an L–DACS would include the following: 

 Pilot/UA control links, including telecommand and telemetry 

 Pilot/UA NavAids data exchanges 

 Relaying ATC voice messages to and from UA pilots 

 Relaying ATS data messages to and from UA pilots6

 UA-to-pilot downlinking of nonpayload target-track data 

 UA-to-pilot downlinking of data from UA-borne weather radars 

 UA-to-pilot downlinking of safety-related video data from UA to pilots 

 UA-to-pilot downlinking of safety-related sense and avoid automated decisionmaking from UA 

to pilots 

Section 6.0 contains more detail on UAS-related services. 

3.5.3.3 Airborne System Wide Information Management (SWIM) Suitable Services 

SWIM, an FAA technology program designed to facilitate sharing of ATM system information 

(airport operational status, weather information, flight data, status of special-use airspace, and NAS 

restrictions), can be implemented via G/G, A/G, and A/A communications infrastructure components. 

Each of these components would enable efficient data exchange between authorized users in the 

respective domain. An L–DACS could provide means for the A/A and A/G data transfer. 

An implementation of the proposed L-band system would facilitate meeting the primary objective of 

the SWIM program: that is, to improve the FAA’s ability to manage the efficient flow of information 

through the NAS. When used to enable Airborne SWIM capabilities, an L-band system could be designed 

to assure that its use provides the following desired SWIM features: 

 Reduced costs for NAS users to acquire NAS data and exchange information 

 Increased shared situational awareness among the NAS user community 

 FAA-compliant secure data exchange among the NAS user community 

Figure 18 shows how Airborne SWIM (with the communication links potentially provided over the 

L-band) fits in the overall FAA A/G communications plan and illustrates interactions of SWIM elements 

with the other NextGen programs, such as automatic dependence surveillance–broadcast (ADS–B) and 

Data Comm. 

 

6

 Such as the services presented in the COCR, including those listed above in Section 4.2. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 33 

Figure 18.— Airborne System Wide Information Management (SWIM) and other Next Generation Air Transportation 

System (NextGen) programs (Ref. 28). Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. 

Figure 18 shows L–DACS communications links will have a lower safety targets when used to 

provide SWIM-related services compared with the other data communications services. For example, 

Figure 18 shows a required level of C3 (medium risk) for Data Comm and D/E 4/5 (low risk) for SWIM 

(see Ref. 29 for more information). Although it is anticipated that some Airborne SWIM services could be 

provided over commercial (i.e., unprotected (non-AM(R)S)) spectrum—as shown in the figure—it is 

likely that other Airborne SWIM services could make use of protected spectrum to support “regularity of 

flight.”7

 These later services would be suitable targets for an L–DACS implementation. 

As part of SWIM, L–DACS would enable exchange of information between diverse users adopting a 

service-oriented architecture (SOA). Services would be offered from individual providers as well as 

centralized providers. 

Figure 19 shows A/G (airborne) and G/G SWIM elements. The figure depicts Airborne SWIM 

(potentially provided over L–DACS) as a facilitator of NAS data exchange, such as surveillance, flight, 

aeronautical, meteorological, air traffic flow and capacity management (ATFCM) scenario, and demand 

and capacity data. 

 

7

 For example, current Aeronautical (Airline) Operational Control (AOC) communications is conducted 

over AM(R)S spectrum to support regularity of flight operations rather than “safety of flight” operations. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 34 

Figure 19.—Air-to-ground data link management and aircraft participation in System Wide Information Management 

(SWIM) (slightly modified from Ref. 30). Copyright Thales Air Systems; used with permission. Acronyms are defined 

in Appendix A. 

These mostly weather advisory and aeronautical information services include 

 Aviation digital data service (ADDS) 

 AWOS data acquisition service (ADAS) 

 Expanded terminal and tower data service 

 General information (GI) message distribution service 

 Information display system (IDS) data service 

 NextGen Network Enabled Weather (NNEW) service8 

 Notices to airmen (NOTAM) distribution service 

 TMA flight data service 

 WARP/WINS NEXRAD service 

Figure 20 illustrates introduction of SWIM services over time. Implementation of the proposed 

L–DACS is likely to overlap with SWIM Segments 3 and 4 when air/airborne is introduced. 

 

8

 It is possible that the information provided through the NNEW service could range from the advisory for 

routine forecasts through safety-critical information for certain hazardous weather warning messages, 

which might limit the extent to which this might be provided over commercial links. This requires further 

investigation. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 35 

Figure 20.—System Wide Information Management (SWIM) execution by segments (Ref. 28). 

3.5.4 NextGen Communications Operational Concepts 

Figure 21 shows a typical flight profile and the ATS functions supporting the user in each domain. 

Figure 21.—Typical National Airspace System (NAS) flight profile and the air traffic services (ATS) 

functions (Ref. 7). 

Table 5 provides a listing of the operational scenarios and concepts envisioned for the midterm of the 

NextGen airport surface flight phase show in Figure 21. Although most, if not all, of these are currently 

envisioned for Data Comm, these are technology independent, and, thus, equally valid for an L–DACS 

implementation. 

 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 36 

TABLE 5.—NEXT GENERATION AIR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM (NextGen) MIDTERM OPERATIONAL 

CONCEPTS FOR THE AIRPORT SURFACE 

Phase of flight NextGen midterm communications operational concept (from Ref. 10) 

Flight planning Access to flight planning information will be available to authorized users via a secure network 

and will include a publish/subscribe capability so that users can receive automatic updates when 

conditions change along the proposed flight path. 

Push back, taxi, and 

departure 

As the time for the flight approaches, the final flight path agreement will be delivered as a data 

message to pilots who access the agreement before beginning the flight. 

Climb and cruise Data communications will increase efficiency by providing routine and strategic information to the 

pilot and automating certain routine tasks for both the pilot and controller.

A decreased number of voice communications also will reduce radio frequency congestion and 

eliminate verbal miscommunication—a great safety improvement that will reduce operational 

errors.

Providing changes to radio frequencies and other information, such as local barometric pressure 

and required weather advisories, by data communications link can also reduce errors.

When weather impacts numerous flights, clearances for data communications capable aircraft can 

be sent all at once, increasing controller and operator efficiency.

If potential conflicts with other aircraft or other constraints, such as weather or homeland security 

interventions, develop along the path, the NextGen system will identify the problem and provide 

recommended path trajectory or speed changes to eliminate the conflict. The controller will send 

the pilot the proposed change via a data communications link, if the aircraft is equipped.

When re-routing is required, the flight can be assigned precision offsets to the published route. 

These offsets will become a way of turning a single published route into a “multi-lane highway.” 

Use of offsets will increase capacity in a section of airspace. These reroutes can be tailored for 

each flight. Since the final agreement will be reached via data messaging, complex reroutes can be 

more detailed than those constrained by the limitations of voice communications and can reduce 

one source of error in communications.

As weather and wind conditions change above the ocean, both individual reroutes and changes to 

the entire route structure will be managed via a data communications link. 

Descent and approach Information such as proposed arrival time, sequencing and route assignments will be exchanged 

with the aircraft via a data communications link to negotiate a final flight path. 

Landing, taxi, arrival Before the flight lands, both the preferred taxiway to be used for exiting the runway and the taxi 

path to the assigned parking will be available to the flight crew via a data communications link. 

3.5.5 Communications Operational Services and Concepts Based on Flight Domain 

Operational concepts can also be defined according to the different geographic flight domains, 

defined as follows (from Ref. 31): 

 Airport (APT): airport surface/immediate vicinity of the airport. 

 Terminal maneuvering area (TMA): airspace surrounding an airport to about 50 nautical miles 

from the center of an airport. 

 En route (ENR): airspace that surrounds the TMA domain. This is the continental or domestic 

airspace used by ATC for the cruise portion of a flight. 

 Oceanic, remote, polar (ORP): same as the ENR domain, but in geographical areas generally 

outside of domestic airspace. 

 Autonomous operations area (AOA): airspace associated with autonomous operations where 

aircraft self-separate. 

 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 37 

Table 6 illustrates the potential operational use of the proposed L-band system based on the COCR 

services previously identified as potential applications (Ref. 11). 

TABLE 6.—USE OF THE PROPOSED L-BAND SYSTEM IN THE AIRPORT FLIGHT DOMAIN 

[Acronyms are defined in Appendix A.] 

Operational 

services 

Airport domain phases 

Predeparture 

airport 

domaina

Departure 

taxi airport 

domaina

Departure 

TMA 

domaina

ENR ORP 

and AOA 

domains 

Arrival 

TMA 

domaina

Arrival 

airport 

domaina

Arrival taxi 

airport 

domaina

Flight information 

services 

D–OTIS 

D–RVR 

D–SIG 

D–SIGMET 

D–OTIS 

D–RVR 

D–SIG 

D–SIGMET 

D–ORIS 

D–OTIS 

D–RVR 

D–SIG 

D–SIGMET 

D–ORIS 

D–OTIS 

D–RVR 

D–SIGMET 

D–OTIS 

D–RVR 

D–SIG 

D–SIGMET 

D–OTIS 

D–RVR 

D–SIG 

D–RVR 

D–SIG 

Flight position, 

flight intent, and 

flight preferences 

services 

PPD 

FLIPCY 

WAKE 

PPD 

FLIPCY 

WAKE 

PPD 

FLIPCY 

SAPb 

WAKE 

PPD 

FLIPCY 

SAP 

WAKEc

PPD 

FLIPCY 

SAP 

WAKE 

PPD 

FLIPCY 

WAKE 

PPD 

FLIPCY 

WAKE

Advisory service DYNAV 

Emergency 

information service 

URCO URCO URCO URCO URCO URCO URCO 

Air-to-air service AIRSEP 

UAS services Pilot/UA control links, including telecommand and telemetry 

Pilot/UA NavAids data exchanges 

Relaying ATC voice messages to and from UA pilots 

Relaying ATS data messages to and from UA pilots 

UA-to-pilot downlinking of nonpayload target-track data 

UA-to-pilot downlinking of data from UA-borne weather radars 

UA-to-pilot downlinking of safety-related video data from UA to pilots 

UA-to-pilot downlinking of safety-related sense and avoid automated decisionmaking from UA to pilots 

Airborne SWIM 

suitable services 

(generally weather 

advisory and 

aeronautical 

information 

services) 

ADDS, ADAS, expanded terminal and tower data service, general information (GI) message distribution 

service, IDS data service, NNEW serviced

, NOTAM distribution service, TMA flight data service 

WARP/WINS NEXRAD Service 

a

While the L-band system is proposed to be implemented with the primary objective of supporting en route and terminal 

communications (i.e., ENR and TMA domains), the L-band system could be used on the ground (i.e., airport domain) as well as in 

the air, for example, to avoid switching the links. As such, some ATC services are included in the table for the airport domain. b

SAP is primarily used en route and terminal areas but is available in all phases of flight. c WAKE service is not available in AOA and ORP domains. d

It is possible that the information provided through the NNEW service could range from the advisory for routine forecasts 

through safety critical for certain hazardous weather warning messages, which might limit the extent to which this might be 

provided over commercial links. This requires further investigation. 

Examples of operational messages that could be transmitted over the proposed L-band data link in 

support of the services in each flight domain are presented in Table 7. The messages are grouped 

according to the information type, as defined by the function identifications (IDs) provided in Section 7.0. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 38 

TABLE 7.—EXAMPLE L-BAND DATA LINK MESSAGES 

Information type (including 

corresponding 

function ID) 

Message examples 

Transceive air traffic services 

(ATS) to airborne aircraft 

message 

L.1.1.1.1 

Contract requesting data 

Contract acknowledgements 

Operational terminal information service (OTIS) reports, addressed or broadcast 

communications 

Operational en route information service (ORIS) reports, addressed or broadcast 

communications 

Significant meteorological information (SIGMET) reports, addressed or broadcast 

communications, event basis only 

Airport data to be displayed on board (data link surface information and guidance, 

D–SIG) 

Runway visual range (RVR) information, addressed or broadcast communications 

Available alternative routes (dynamic route availability, DYNAV), addressed 

communication 

Urgent contact message (URCO), addressed and/or broadcast communications 

Transceive airborne aircraft to 

ATS message 

L.1.1.2.1 

Requests (i.e., demand, periodic, or event contract) for reports 

Contract acknowledgements 

Current and periodic position (flight plan consistency, FLIPCY), addressed 

communications 

Meteorological data (FLIPCY), addressed communications 

Ground speed (FLIPCY), addressed communications 

Indicated heading, indicated air speed or mach, vertical rate, selected level, and 

wind vector (system access parameters, SAP), addressed communications 

Broadcast of aircraft wake turbulence (WAKE) characteristics (e.g., aircraft type, 

weight, and flap and speed settings) 

Flight limitations (e.g., maximum acceptable flight level) (pilot preferences 

downlink, PPD), addressed communications 

Pilot flight preferences (PPD), addressed communications 

Flight plan modification requests (e.g., desired route or speed limitations) (PPD), 

addressed communications 

URCO, addressed and/or broadcast communications 

Transceive ATS to 

on-ground 

aircraft message 

L.1.1.1.2 

Contract requesting data 

Contract acknowledgements 

OTIS reports, addressed or broadcast communications 

ORIS reports, addressed or broadcast communications 

SIGMET reports, addressed or broadcast communications, event basis only 

Airport data to be displayed on board (D–SIG) 

RVR information, addressed or broadcast communications 

Available alternative routes (DYNAV), addressed communication 

URCO, addressed and/or broadcast communications 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 39 

TABLE 7.—EXAMPLE L-BAND DATA LINK MESSAGES 

Information type (including 

corresponding 

function ID) 

Message examples 

Transceive on-ground aircraft 

to ATS message 

L.1.1.2.2 

Requests (i.e., demand, periodic, or event contract) for reports 

Contract acknowledgements 

Current and periodic position (FLIPCY), addressed communications 

Meteorological data (FLIPCY), addressed communications 

Ground speed (FLIPCY), addressed communications 

Indicated heading, indicated air speed or match, vertical rate, selected level, and 

wind vector (SAP), addressed communications 

Broadcast of WAKE characteristics (e.g., aircraft type, weight, and flap and speed 

settings) 

Flight limitations (e.g., maximum acceptable flight level) (PPD), addressed 

communications 

Pilot flight preferences (PPD), addressed communications 

Flight plan modification requests (e.g., desired route or speed limitations) (PPD), 

addressed communications 

URCO, addressed and/or broadcast communications 

Transceive airborne aircraft to 

airborne aircraft message 

L.1.1.3.1 

Trajectory intent exchange (air-to-air self-separation, AIRSEP), addressed and/or 

broadcast communications. 

Conflict negotiation (AIRSEP), addressed and/or broadcast communications. 

Resolution accept/confirmation 

3.5.6 L–DACS Operational Concepts Derived from the COCR 

Table 8 shows examples of operational scenarios for the proposed L-band system according to 

specific services identified earlier (Ref. 11) as proposed L–DACS applications (services that are not 

planned to be implemented by Data Comm through Segment 3). The scenarios are a subset of those 

provided in COCR Version 2.0 (Ref. 5). 

Refer to Section 6 for ConUse and operational scenarios applicable to UAS. 

TABLE 8.—EXAMPLE OPERATIONAL SCENARIOS 

Flight domain Communication scenarios 

Pre-departure 

airport domain 

• The flight crew initiates a request for a data link operational terminal information service (D–OTIS) contract 

for the departure airfield. The flight information service (FIS) system response provides all relevant 

information for the weather, Automatic Terminal Information Service (ATIS), and field conditions, plus the 

local Notices to Airmen (NOTAMs). 

• In low-visibility conditions, the flight crew may also use the data link runway visual range (D–RVR) service 

to request RVR information for the departure and the destination airports. For data-link-equipped aircraft 

preparing to taxi, the current graphical picture of the ground operational environment is uplinked and loaded 

using the data link surface information guidance (D–SIG) service. 

• The flight crew specifies preferences that should be considered by the controllers using the pilot preferences 

downlink (PPD) service. 

Departure 

terminal 

maneuvering 

area (TMA) 

domain 

• The system access parameters (SAP) service is initiated by the air traffic service unit (ATSU) automation 

system, and the downlinked information is provided to the various ground components (e.g., for smoothing 

of trackers) or on request for display of parameters to controllers. The ATSU automation system monitors 

the aircraft behavior in accordance with the given clearances. The tracking system issues warnings to the 

executive controller in case of noncompliance. The executive controller intervenes if the situation requires 

action. The tracking system uses the automatic dependent surveillance (ADS) and radar data to monitor 

whether the aircraft performance is in accordance with the ground-predicted trajectory and updates the 

trajectory where necessary. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 40 

TABLE 8.—EXAMPLE OPERATIONAL SCENARIOS 

Flight domain Communication scenarios 

En route, ocean, 

remote, polar 

(ORP) and 

autonomous 

operations area 

(AOA) domains 

• The ATSU automation system confirms/sets the exit/entry conditions with the sectors in the en route phase. 

At each entry into a subsequent ATSU, FLIPCY is performed to verify the flight management system route 

against what is held in the ATSU flight data processing system. 

• Planning controller indicating that moderate to severe turbulence may be expected over this portion of the 

flight. This information is sent to the aircraft via the data link significant meteorological information 

(D–SIGMET) service. A new network connection is established between the aircraft and the oceanic/remote 

domain ground system before the connection with the en route domain ground system is released. 

• The planning controller analyses interactions with other aircraft that are reported to him/her by the conflict 

probe system. The planning controller probes “what-if” solutions for interactions. The conflict probe system 

may offer alternatives to the existing route, the planning controller assesses these alternatives, and the 

alternatives are provided via the dynamic route availability (DYNAV) service for flight crew assessment. 

The planning controller enters the flight-crew-selected alternative and updates the flight trajectory in the 

ATSU automation system. The flight crew flies the aircraft according to the instructions given. The ATSU 

automation system recognizes the aircraft’s position relative to exiting the ATSU, compiles a data link 

operational en route information service (D–ORIS) report specific to the remaining portion of the area to be 

over-flown, and sends it to the aircraft. 

Arrival TMA 

domain 

• The system updates arrival manager (AMAN) with changes to the arrival sequence. AMAN calculates 

constraints by taking into account the actual traffic situation and makes the information (time to lose, gain, 

or hold) available to the concerned planning controller and executive controllers in upstream sectors/ATSUs. 

If required, the conflict probe system calculates a conflict-free alternative trajectory for the flight to comply 

with the AMAN constraints. The planning controller of the receiving sector checks the PPD service 

information to see if the conflict probe system-provided trajectory could be improved with these 

preferences. The planning controller accepts the proposal and coordinates the sending of the ACL 

instruction with the Executive Controller. Based on the equipage and flight crew qualification information 

contained in the flight plan and data obtained via SAP and PPD, the Executive Controller determines which 

aircraft may execute a spacing application and issues merging and spacing clearances to those aircraft via 

ACL. (ACL is not proposed to be supported by L–DACS) 

• The ATSU automation generates a D–SIG of the arrival airport surface. The D–SIG surface map is 

communicated in advance o the landing clearance so that the Flight Crew can determine any impacts to its 

configuration. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 41 

4.0 L–DACS System Requirements 

4.1 L–DACS System Requirements Development Process 

Figure 4 in Section 1.0 presented an overview of document development processes including the 

development of system requirements. 

Functional system requirements were derived by merging the requirements identified in a bottom-up 

assessment with those derived as a result of the top-down analysis as introduced in Sections 4.2 and 4.3, 

respectively. 

The top-down functional requirements were derived from the ConUse and the associated functions. In 

parallel with that process, a bottom-up assessment of existing requirements provided in relevant 

documents such as NAS–SR–1000 (Ref. 13), the COCR (Ref. 5), and the Data Comm performance 

requirements was performed. 

The bottom-up approach involves analyzing existing NAS requirements and communications systems 

and their associated requirements and assessing the applicability to the current needs. Thus, the approach 

can be viewed as one that addresses how the proposed system fits into the existing environment. The 

subsections below provide an overview of the services identified as potential candidates for the L–DACS. 

Current communication system requirements to enable these services provide the bottom-up functional 

requirements. 

Performance requirements were then derived based on the functional requirements and analysis of the 

existing standards and the expected operating environment. 

4.2 Functional Requirements for L–DACS Services—Bottom-Up Assessment 

The following functional requirements were extracted from the superset of NAS requirements 

specified in the NAS SR–1000 document (Ref. 16). 

TABLE 9.—NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM (NAS) FUNCTIONS 

[Numbers in the table correspond to communication requirements in the NAS SR–1000 (Ref. 16)] 

NAS functions Communication requirements 

Plan flights Evaluate flight 

conditions 

The NAS shall disseminate the status of special use airspace to users. (08760) 

The NAS shall disseminate weather information to users to support flight planning. 

(27150) 

The NAS shall disseminate aeronautical information to users to support flight planning. 

(27160) 

Manage flight 

plans 

The NAS shall disseminate flight information to users. (00010) 

The NAS shall disseminate flight plan information to users via external data interfaces. 

(00410) 

The NAS shall disseminate flight plan information to users via air-ground data 

communications. (00970) 

The NAS shall disseminate flight data summaries to users. (00070) 

The NAS shall disseminate flight plans to users. (02160) 

The NAS shall disseminate flight plan clearances to users. (02900) 

The NAS shall disseminate recommended collision avoidance maneuvers to users. (03690) 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 42 

TABLE 9.—NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM (NAS) FUNCTIONS 

[Numbers in the table correspond to communication requirements in the NAS SR–1000 (Ref. 16)] 

NAS functions Communication requirements 

Monitor flights Collect 

surveillance 

information 

The NAS shall disseminate the location of an aircraft equipped with a functioning VHF 

transceiver in designated areas greater than or equal to 2000 feet above ground level 

independent of surveillance capabilities. (12960) 

Monitor aircraft 

status 

The NAS shall respond to requests for assistance from in-flight users. (12560) 

The NAS shall respond to emergency transmission received via radio communications. 

(12600) 

The NAS shall respond to emergency transmissions received via data link. (12620) 

The NAS shall continuously monitor air-to-ground communications utilizing designated 

frequencies for detection of emergency transmissions. (12650) 

The NAS shall transmit aerodrome recommendations to expedite resolution of emergency 

situations. (12830) 

The NAS shall accept airspace reservations from search and rescue aircraft. (13150) 

The NAS shall exchange essential information and emergency alert information with 

aircraft in the area via external data interfaces. (22310) 

The NAS shall disseminate essential information on missing aircraft. (13130) 

Report aircraft 

status 

The NAS shall disseminate current flight activity information in restricted areas. (08780) 

The NAS shall disseminate current flight activity information in warning areas. (08790) 

The NAS shall transmit conflict-free flight path recommendations to expedite resolution of 

emergency situations. (12820) 

Control traffic Address active 

aircraft conflicts 

The NAS shall disseminate recommended collision avoidance maneuvers to users. (03690) 

Control aircraft The NAS shall disseminate aeronautical information to users via air-ground data 

communications. (07440) 

Coordinate traffic 

control 

distribution 

The NAS shall acquire pilot reports (PIREP). (05530) 

The NAS shall acquire PIREP from airborne pilots. (05570) 

The NAS shall disseminate weather advisories via direct specialist to pilot communications. 

(09290) 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 43 

TABLE 9.—NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM (NAS) FUNCTIONS 

[Numbers in the table correspond to communication requirements in the NAS SR–1000 (Ref. 16)] 

NAS functions Communication requirements 

Support flight 

operations 

Manage weather 

information 

The NAS shall disseminate graphical weather information to airborne users. (06310) 

The NAS shall maintain communication links adequate to avoid user delay in gaining 

access. (07090) 

The NAS shall disseminate weather information to users continuously. (07110) 

The NAS shall disseminate current weather effect along the users proposed flight path. 

(07470) 

The NAS shall disseminate forecast weather in effect along the users proposed flight path. 

(07480) 

The NAS shall disseminate intensity levels of weather by route of flight to users. (08260) 

The NAS shall disseminate intensity levels of weather by geographic area to users. (08300) 

The NAS shall disseminate weather advisories to users in response to a request. (09300) 

The NAS shall broadcast the latest approved aerodrome conditions on communications 

media accessible by aircraft in flight. (09330) 

The NAS shall broadcast the latest approved aerodrome conditions on communications 

media accessible by aircraft on the ground. (09340) 

The NAS shall broadcast the latest approved terminal area conditions on communications 

media accessible by aircraft in flight. (09350) 

The NAS shall broadcast the latest approved terminal area conditions on communications 

media accessible by aircraft on the ground. (09360) 

The NAS shall respond to user requests for weather information from NAS facilities 

through common carrier communications networks. (09370) 

The NAS shall disseminate selected weather information directly to appropriately equipped 

aircraft. (09420) 

The NAS shall display intensity levels of weather by geographic area to users. (08310) 

The NAS shall display intensity levels of weather by route of flight to users. (08280) 

The NAS shall accept requests for weather information from airborne aircraft via data link 

communications. (09550) 

The NAS shall provide flexible and convenient access to required weather information to 

users. (19380) 

The NAS shall provide weather advisories to aircraft in flight. (19790) 

The NAS shall disseminate weather information to airborne users for pictorial display. 

(06290) 

Operate 

NAVAIDSa

The NAS shall coordinate navigation guidance information reception requirements between 

en route and terminal area navigation systems to minimize equipment costs to users. 

(14770) 

The NAS shall disseminate nonprecision-approach and missed-approach position guidance 

information to users. (14330) 

The NAS shall disseminate navigational accuracy correction values for supplemental 

navigation systems to users. (17040) 

The NAS shall disseminate correction values for navigational aids to users. (16790) 

The NAS shall disseminate available supplemental terminal navigation guidance 

information error correction values to users. (14820) 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 44 

TABLE 9.—NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM (NAS) FUNCTIONS 

[Numbers in the table correspond to communication requirements in the NAS SR–1000 (Ref. 16)] 

NAS functions Communication requirements 

Monitor NAS 

operations 

Monitor NAS 

flight operations 

The NAS shall disseminate future delay advisories in effect along the users proposed flight 

path. (07500) 

The NAS shall disseminate traffic advisories upon user request. (09120) 

The NAS shall disseminate advisories to aircraft approaching special use airspace. (09210) 

The NAS shall disseminate traffic advisories to pilots when applying VFR separation 

services. (19780) 

The NAS shall provide traffic alerts to participating aircraft within 5 NMI, 500 feet below 

and 500 above special use airspace. (04350) 

The NAS shall provide traffic advisories to aircraft on the surface. (30270) 

Maintain NAS 

infrastructure 

The NAS shall disseminate airway usage information to users. (00030 

The NAS shall disseminate route usage information to users. (00050) 

The NAS shall disseminate aeronautical information to users via external data interfaces. 

(07430) 

The NAS shall disseminate aeronautical information per user request. (07130) 

The NAS shall disseminate aeronautical information upon user request continuously. 

(07340) 

The NAS shall disseminate aeronautical data for a maximum of 8 specified locations per 

request. (07400) 

The NAS shall disseminate the status of supplemental navigation systems to users. (17010) 

The NAS shall disseminate status of supplemental navigation systems to users. (16770) 

The NAS shall disseminate flow control information to users via external data interfaces. 

(07920) 

The NAS shall disseminate derived restrictions to the user. (11700) 

The NAS shall disseminate alternate courses of action relative to flight restrictions to users. 

(11790) 

The NAS shall disseminate terrain information compliant with terrain, ground and obstacle 

information accuracy requirements, to users upon request. (03900) 

The NAS shall disseminate manmade obstacle information compliant with terrain, ground 

and obstacle information accuracy requirements, to users upon request. (03940) 

The NAS shall disseminate ground information compliant with terrain, ground and obstacle 

information accuracy requirements, to users upon request. (25520) 

The NAS shall disseminate filtered terrain information to users. (25560) 

The NAS shall disseminate filtered ground information to users. (25570) 

The NAS shall disseminate filtered manmade obstacle information to users. (25580) 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 45 

TABLE 9.—NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM (NAS) FUNCTIONS 

[Numbers in the table correspond to communication requirements in the NAS SR–1000 (Ref. 16)] 

NAS functions Communication requirements 

Plan NAS 

usage 

Plan traffic flow The NAS shall disseminate preferred route information at least 24 hours prior to it 

becoming effective. (07280) 

The NAS shall disseminate military air traffic control plans related to national emergencies. 

(16140) 

The NAS shall disseminate flow control information to users via external data interfaces. 

(07920) 

The NAS shall disseminate interfacility traffic flow plans. (11970) 

The NAS shall disseminate derived restrictions to the user. (11700) 

The NAS shall disseminate derived alternative courses of action to the user. (11720) 

The NAS shall determine flight restrictions for specific aircraft. (11760) 

The NAS shall disseminate flight restrictions to users. (11770) 

The NAS shall disseminate alternate courses of action relative to flight restrictions to users. 

(11790) 

The NAS shall process derived alternatives to the user. (11680) 

Assess Traffic 

Flow Performance 

The NAS shall disseminate reports on equipment performance. (18870) 

The NAS shall disseminate reports on maintenance activities. (18880) 

The NAS shall disseminate reports on equipment repair activities. (18890) 

a These services are typically provided via satellite communication but could be provided via a ground-based system. 

4.3 L–DACS Functional System Requirements—Top-Down Approach 

This section presents a top-down determination of functional requirements through (1) a functional 

analysis based on prior work and (2) a functional analysis based on the ConUse defined in Section 3.0, 

and an analysis of appropriate NAS–SR–1000 requirements. 

4.3.1 Prior Functional Analysis 

4.3.1.1 L–DACS Functional Architecture 

A functional architecture can interpreted as a hierarchical arrangement of functions and interfaces that 

represents the complete system from a performance and behavioral perspective (Ref. 8). For its top-down 

functional analysis, this report leverages prior functional analysis work performed under this NASA 

contract to characterize aeronautical A/G and A/G communication. Appendix C presents a hierarchical 

decomposition of functions as diagrams and in an outline format derived from Reference 8. 

Functional architectures can be presented in several different ways. As indicated in the SEM (Ref. 8), 

the FAA “prefers using the complementary FFBD (functional flow block diagram) and N2 diagramming 

techniques for modeling the functional behavior of a system.... The simple FFBD technique captures the 

control (or the logical) environment of a system, while the N2 diagramming captures the data 

environment of a system.” These two techniques are illustrated in Figure 22 and Figure 23, respectively. 

N2 charts were selected to document the L-band functional architecture defined in Appendix C for this 

high-level architecture and requirements document. These charts are presented in Appendix D. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 46 

Figure 22.—Functional flow block diagram (from Ref. 8). 

Figure 23.—N2 diagram (from Ref. 8). 

4.3.2 L–DACS Concepts-of-Operations-Based Functional Analysis 

L–DACS could provide a communication link to transfer surveillance and weather information, 

facilitate flight and resource management, enhance collaborative decision making, and enable exchange 

of aeronautical information in the future NAS. Tables in Appendix A document the select RTCA NAS 

ConOps (Ref. 1) found applicable to the proposed L–DACS.9

 

 

 

9

 Although the RTCA document (Ref. 1) describes the NAS evolution in terms of three time periods—

near (up to 2005), mid (2005 through 2010) and far (beyond 2010)—concepts identified in the document 

are found applicable for the proposed L–DACS, even though it is likely to be implemented beyond 2020 

to 2025. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 47 

L–DACS should enable a reliable and consistent data exchange by providing the following 

functionality: 

 Enable G/A and A/G communication for fixed-to-mobile as well as mobile-to-mobile users 

 Enable A/A communication 

 Support addressed communication for delivery of information to individual and multiple users 

 Support broadcast communication for delivery of information to multiple users 

 Support delivery of real-time information in a timely manner 

 Enable demand, periodic, and event communication 

 Accommodate a wide range of data types (e.g., surveillance reports, weather raw data and 

products, flight profiles) to support common situational awareness 

 Support multiple QoS, priority, and preemption 

 Support authentication of users and controlled access to NAS information (security) 

 Provide support of both FAA and non-FAA ground and airborne users 

 Avoid single points of failure 

 Provide a scalable solution 

 Provide standards-based solution 

Table 10 presents system requirements associated with the above functionality. 

TABLE 10.—MAPPING OF L–DACS SYSTEM FUNCTIONS TO SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS 

System functions System requirementsa

Enable ground-to-air (G/A) and air-to-ground (A/G) 

communication for fixed-to- mobile as well as 

mobile- to-mobile users 

The system shall enable G/A communication for fixed-to-mobile users. 

The system shall enable G/A communication for mobile-to-mobile users. 

The system shall enable A/G communication for fixed-to-mobile users. 

The system shall enable A/G communication for mobile-to-mobile users. 

Enable air-to-air (A/A) communication The system shall enable A/A communication 

Support addressed communication for delivery of 

information to individual and multiple users 

The system shall support addressed communication for delivery of 

information to individual users 

The system shall support addressed communication for delivery of 

information to multiple users 

Support broadcast communication for delivery of 

information to multiple users 

The system shall support broadcast communication for delivery of 

information to multiple users 

Support delivery of real-time information in a timely 

manner 

The system shall support delivery of real-time information in a timely 

manner 

Enable demand, periodic, and event communication The system shall enable demand communication 

The system shall enable periodic communication 

The system shall enable event communication 

Accommodate a wide range of data types (e.g., 

surveillance reports, weather raw data and products, 

flight profiles, etc.) to support common situational 

awareness 

The system shall accommodate a wide range of data types (e.g., 

surveillance reports, weather raw data and products, flight profiles, etc.) to 

support common situational awareness 

Support multiple quality of service (QoS) provisions The system shall support multiple QoS offerings, such as priority and 

preemption capabilities, and so on 

Support authentication of users and controlled 

access to National Airspace System (NAS) 

information (security) 

The system shall support authentication of users (security) 

The system shall support controlled access to NAS information (security) 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 48 

TABLE 10.—MAPPING OF L–DACS SYSTEM FUNCTIONS TO SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS 

System functions System requirementsa

Provide support of both Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) and non-FAA ground and 

airborne usersb

The system shall provide support of FAA ground users 

The system shall provide support of FAA airborne users 

The system shall provide support of non-FAA ground users 

The system shall provide support of non-FAA airborne users 

Avoid single points of failure The system shall avoid single points of failure 

Provide a scalable solution The system shall provide a scalable solution 

Provide standards-based solution The system shall provide standards-based solution 

a

All the requirements presented in the document are documented as “system shall” not “system must.” The verbiage is consistent 

with that used in the NAS SR–1000 as opposed to some of the newer requirements documents, for example Data Comm FPR. b

To support increasing collaboration among NAS users, the proposed system shall accommodate a wide range of NAS users by 

accepting NAS data from NAS data sources, both internal and external to the FAA. Users may include aircraft, airline operation 

centers, service providers, FAA users, and other government agencies. 

The identified NAS ConOps can then be traced to the desired functionality of the proposed network. 

Table 11 maps capabilities identified in the ConUse activities and described in the preceding sections to 

specific functions necessary to enable those concepts. These functions are grouped into appropriate 

functional hierarchies and functional requirements are derived. This encompasses a top-down approach to 

the development of functional requirements. Mapping the proposed services to the desired system 

capabilities and functional architectures presents combined functional requirements from the top-down 

and bottom-up approaches. 

TABLE 11.—MAPPING L–DACS FUNCTIONALITY TO NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM (NAS) 

CONCEPTS OF OPERATIONS (ConOps) 

[Acronyms are defined in Appendix A.] 

Desired L–DACS capabilities 4.3.3 NAS ConOps referencesa Functional 

hierarchy 

reference 

Communications 

operating concept 

and requirements 

(COCR) air traffic 

services (ATS) 

Enable ground-to-air (G/A) and air-to-ground 

(A/G) communication for fixed to mobile as 

well as mobile to mobile users. 

S–1; S–3; S–4; 

W–2; W–3; W–5; W–9; W–10; W–11; 

W–12; W–14; W–15; W–16; W–17; W–19; 

W–20; W–22; W–27; 

FM–3; FM–6; FM–9; FM–11; FM–13; 

FM–17; FM–21; FM–22; FM 24; FM–32; 

FM–41, FM–42; 

A–5; A–14; A–23; A–26; A–28; A–29; 

A–30; A–33; A–34 

L.1.1.1.1 

L.1.1.1.2 

L.1.1.2.1 

L.1.1.2.2 

D–ORIS 

D–OTIS 

D–RVR 

DYNAV 

FLYPCY 

SAP 

WAKE 

PPD 

URCO 

Enable air-to-air (A/A) communication S–7; 

W–26 

L.1.1.3.1 AIRSEP 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 49 

TABLE 11.—MAPPING L–DACS FUNCTIONALITY TO NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM (NAS) 

CONCEPTS OF OPERATIONS (ConOps) 

[Acronyms are defined in Appendix A.] 

Desired L–DACS capabilities 4.3.3 NAS ConOps referencesa Functional 

hierarchy 

reference 

Communications 

operating concept 

and requirements 

(COCR) air traffic 

services (ATS) 

Support addressed communication for delivery 

of information to individual and multiple users 

S–1; 

W–12; 

FM–11; FM–13 

L.1.1.1.1 

L.1.1.1.2 

L.1.1.2.1 

L.1.1.2.2 

L.1.1.3.1 

D–ORIS 

D–OTIS 

D–RVR 

DYNAV 

FLIPCY 

SAP 

PPD 

URCO 

AIRSEP 

Support broadcast communication for delivery 

of information to multiple users 

S–1; S–4; 

W–2; W–3; W–14; W–16; W–20; W–26; 

FM–13; 

A–23 

L.1.1.1.1 

L.1.1.1.2 

L.1.1.2.1 

L.1.1.2.2 

L.1.1.3.1 

D–ORIS 

D–OTIS 

D–RVR 

WAKE 

URCO 

AIRSEP 

Support delivery of real-time information in a 

timely manner 

S–1; S–3; 

W–10; W–18; W–22; W–24 

FM–3; FM–6; FM–14; FM–17; FM–22; 

FM–35; 

A–22; A–31; 

FM–4; FM–15; FM–25; FM–34; 

RM–3; RM–15; 

A–9; A–15 

 D–RVR 

DYNAV 

FLYPCY 

SAP 

WAKE 

PPD 

URCO 

AIRSEP 

Enable demand, periodic, and event 

communication 

S–1; S–8; 

W–14; W–19; W–20 

 All services 

Accommodate a wide range of data types (e.g., 

surveillance reports, weather raw data and 

products, flight profiles, etc.) to support 

common situational awareness 

S–3; 

W–2; W–3; 

A–4; A–11; A–33 

 All services 

Support multiple quality of service (QoS), 

priority, etc. 

 All services 

Support authentication of users and controlled 

access to NAS information (security) 

W–1 All services 

Provide support of both Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) and non-FAA ground 

and airborne users 

S–1; 

FM–18; FM–21; FM–26; FM–29; 

A–18; A–22; A–33; A–35 

 

Avoid single points of failure RM–14 All services 

Provide a scalable solution All services 

Provide standards-based solution All services 

a

Although only select NAS ConOps are presented for this L–DACS capability, most NAS ConOps could be traced to enabling G/A 

and/or A/G communication. 

 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 50 

Functions identified in the NAS SR–1000 document (Ref. 16)—plan flights, monitor flights, control 

traffic, support flight operations, monitor NAS operations, and plan NAS usage—cut across all L–DACS 

capabilities shown in Table 12. 

Table 2 mapped A/G communication functions to NAS service capabilities highlighting services 

potentially enabled by A/G voice communication. 

Similarly, Table 12 highlights capabilities of the proposed system enabling NAS functionality as 

specified in NAS SR–1000. The boxes denote services potentially enabled by A/G communication with 

the blue boxes representing voice and/or data communication and green boxes representing data 

communication only. 

It is possible that some services not identified in NAS SR–1000, for example UAS-related services, 

could be enabled by A/G communication and thus could potentially be conveyed by FCI systems. 

TABLE 12.—MAPPING RELEVANT COMMUNICATIONS FUNCTIONS 

TO NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM (NAS) SERVICE CAPABILITIES (REF. 16) 

 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 51 

A proposed services hierarchy is depicted in Figure 24. 

Figure 24.—Example hierarchical decomposition of a National Airspace System (NAS) architecture air traffic service 

(slightly modified figure from Ref. 32). 

4.4 Infrastructure Requirements—Communications 

Following is a summary of NAS infrastructure (communications) requirements found applicable to 

the proposed L–DACS as documented in the NAS SR–1000 (Ref. 16). The list supports the high-level 

functional requirements presented in the document. 

 The NAS shall provide A/G voice and data communications within the en route and terminal 

airspace of the conterminous United States, Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. (19920) 

 The NAS shall provide data channels in the frequency band appropriate for A/G data communications 

equipment for data communications coverage for both civil and military users. (19940) 

 The NAS shall automate communications capabilities to reduce specialist and user workload. 

(20210) 

 The NAS shall provide A/G communications continuously. (part of 20330) 

 The NAS shall provide reconfiguration of communications capabilities without degradation of 

A/G voice or data communications. (20380) 

 The NAS shall support peak busy hour exchange of data including short-term peaks that may 

occur within the peak hour, with minimal change in the data transmission response times and no 

loss of data. (20760) 

 The NAS shall reconfigure communication capabilities to support changes in operating 

responsibilities. (20800) 

 The NAS shall design emergency communications networks to operate for a 30-day period 

without commercial power at selected critical facilities. (20990) 

 The NAS shall provide processing and communications capacities to support the required backup 

capabilities and to meet the response time requirements specified above, while maintaining safe 

separation of all aircraft receiving ATC services (i.e., both normal and backup sectors) from the 

backup facilities. (21670) 

 The NAS shall provide configurable communications. (32120) 

NAS 

Services

Air Traffic 

Services

Airport Mgmt 

Services

Security 

Services

Safety 

Services

Business 

Mgt Services

Certification 

Services

Flight 

Planning

Separation 

Assurance Advisory

Traffic 

Synchronization

Traffic Flow 

Management Emergency Navigation

Airspace 

Management

Infrastructure and 

Information 

Management

•Flight Plan 

Support 

Flight 

•Plan 

Processing

•AircraftAircraft

•AircraftTerrain

•AircraftAirspace

•Surface

•Weather

•Traffic

•NAS 

Status

...

•Airborne

•Surface

•Long- term 

Planning

•Flight Day 

Management

•Performance 

Assessment

•Emergency 

Assistance

•Alerting 

Support

... ...

•Airborne 

Guidance

•Surface 

Guidance

... ...

•Airspace 

Design

•Airspace 

for Special 

Use

•Monitoring 

and 

Maintenance

•Spectrum 

management

•Government/ 

Agency 

Support

Service Group

Services

Capabilities
NASA/CR—2010-216326 52 

4.5 Performance Requirements 

Performance requirements were derived to define system capabilities based on the functional 

requirements developed in preceding sections and considering propagation characteristic of the L-band. 

Table 13 summarizes NAS performance requirements found relevant to the proposed L–DACS as 

documented in the NAS SR–1000 (Ref. 16). Note that these are high-level NAS requirements that do not 

specify how they should be implemented. A/G communications is considered one of possible 

implementation solutions. 

TABLE 13.—NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM (NAS) PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS 

[Numbers in the table correspond to performance requirements in Ref. 16.] 

NAS function Performance requirement 

Control traffic The NAS shall disseminate hazardous weather avoidance recommendations to users within 1 minute of 

request. (08440) 

The NAS shall communicate aircraft actions to users within 1 minute of implementing a weather avoidance 

plan. (08460) 

The NAS shall alert participating aircraft to predicted conflicts with obstructions within 10 seconds of 

prediction. (09170) 

The NAS shall alert participating aircraft to predicted conflicts with special use airspace within 10 seconds 

of prediction. (09180) 

The NAS shall notify users of non-adherence to ATC clearance within 10 seconds of the detection of the 

deviation. (02010) 

The NAS shall alert appropriately equipped users to the collision danger within 10 seconds after the 

prediction is made. (03660) 

The NAS shall alert users of predicted aircraft-obstacle separation standards violations in en route airspace 

at least 65 seconds in advance of the actual violation of separation standards. (26110) 

The NAS shall alert users of predicted aircraft-terrain separation standards violations in en route airspace at 

least 65 seconds in advance of the actual violation of separation standards. (26100) 

The NAS shall alert users of predicted aircraft-ground separation standards violations in terminal airspace at 

least 30 seconds in advance of the actual violation of separation standards. (26060) 

The NAS shall alert users of predicted aircraft- terrain separation standards violations in terminal airspace at 

least 30 seconds in advance of the actual violation of separation standards. (26070) 

The NAS shall alert users of predicted aircraft-obstacle separation standards violations in terminal airspace 

at least 30 seconds in advance of the actual violation of separation standards. (26080) 

The NAS shall alert users of predicted aircraft-ground separation standards violations in en route airspace at 

least 30 seconds in advance of the actual violation of separation standards. (26090) 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 53 

TABLE 13.—NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM (NAS) PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS 

[Numbers in the table correspond to performance requirements in Ref. 16.] 

NAS function Performance requirement 

Support flight 

operations 

The NAS shall disseminate a requested summary of hazardous weather for any airspace in the continental 

United States within a mean response time 3.0 seconds of the request. (08060) 

The NAS shall notify users affected by the presence of hazardous weather within 2 minutes of acquisition. 

(08170) 

The NAS shall update hazardous weather broadcasts at least once every 30 minutes. (09400) 

The NAS shall disseminate automated weather observations once per minute to designated interfaces. 

(05270) 

The NAS shall disseminate Terminal area hazardous weather information to users within one minute of 

detection. (06990) 

The NAS shall display requested routine weather information to the user within a mean response time of 

3.0 seconds of the request. (23380) 

The NAS shall display requested routine weather information to the user within a 99th percentile response 

time of 5.0 seconds of the request. (23390) 

The NAS shall display requested routine weather information to the user within a maximum response time 

of 10.0 seconds of the request. (23400) 

The NAS shall disseminate a requested summary of hazardous weather for any airspace in the continental 

United States within a 99th percentile response time of 5.0 seconds of the request. (23510) 

The NAS shall disseminate a requested summary of hazardous weather for any airspace in the continental 

United States within a maximum response time of 10.0 seconds of the request. (23520) 

Monitor NAS 

operations 

The NAS shall alert users to a full navigation system failure affecting NAS operations within 10 seconds of 

the failures detection. (17110) 

The NAS shall alert users to a partial navigation system failure affecting NAS operations within 10 seconds 

of the failures detection. (17130) 

The NAS shall disseminate the results of Traffic Management Coordinator capacity projection requests 

within 99th percentile response time of 5.0 seconds of the request. (10820) 

The NAS shall disseminate the results of Traffic Management Coordinator capacity projection requests 

within a maximum response time of 10.0 seconds of the request. (10820) 

The NAS shall disseminate the results of Traffic Management Coordinator demand projection requests 

within the 99th percentile response time of 5.0 seconds of the request. (10850) 

The NAS shall disseminate the results of Traffic Management Coordinator demand projection requests 

within a maximum response time of 10.0 seconds of the request. (10850) 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 54 

TABLE 13.—NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM (NAS) PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS 

[Numbers in the table correspond to performance requirements in Ref. 16.] 

NAS function Performance requirement 

Plan NAS usage The NAS shall disseminate current flight activity information in military special use airspace within 

1 minute of request. (08890) 

The NAS shall disseminate requested flow control advisory information to users within a mean response 

time of 3.0 seconds of the request. (07890) 

The NAS shall disseminate scheduled flight activity information in military special use airspace within 

1 minute of request. (08900) 

The NAS shall disseminate requested delay advisory information to users within a mean response time of 

3.0 seconds of the request. (07900) 

The NAS shall alert users not more than 10 seconds after any failures of navigation guidance affecting 

operations within the NAS. (16810) 

The NAS shall alert users not more than 10 seconds after any failures of portions of navigation guidance 

affecting operations within the NAS. (16820) 

The NAS shall alert users within 10 seconds, of failures to navigation guidance that affect operations. 

(17150) 

The NAS shall alert users within 10 seconds, of failures to portions of navigation guidance that affect 

operations. (09590) 

The NAS shall assure ground-air transmission time for data messages not exceed 6 seconds. (20090) 

The NAS shall provide retrievable air-ground data messages within 30 minutes and from “off-line” storage 

within 60 minutes. (20270) 

Individual air-ground data messages shall be retrievable from “off-line” storage within 5 minutes of a 

request by authorized NAS personnel. (20280) 

The NAS shall strive to restore critical system service to users/specialists within 6 seconds of failure. 

(22900) 

The NAS shall strive to restore essential system service to users/specialists within 10 minutes of failure. 

(22910) 

The NAS shall disseminate requested aeronautical information to users within a mean response time of 

3.0 seconds of the request. (23580) 

The NAS shall disseminate requested aeronautical information to users within a 99th percentile response 

time of 5.0 second of the request. (23590) 

The NAS shall disseminate requested aeronautical information to users within a maximum response time of 

10.0 seconds of the request. (23600) 

The NAS shall disseminate requested flow control advisory information to users within a 99th percentile 

response time of 5.0 seconds of the request. (23950) 

The NAS shall disseminate requested flow control advisory information to users within a maximum 

response time of 10.0 seconds of the request. (23960) 

The NAS shall disseminate requested delay advisory information to users within a 99th percentile response 

time of 5.0 seconds of the request. (23970) 

The NAS shall disseminate requested delay advisory information to users within a maximum response time 

of 10.0 seconds of the request. (23980) 

Table 12 demonstrates how the identified concepts of use map to the functional requirements. They, 

in turn, lead to the performance requirements for addressed and broadcast data services. 

Performance assessments started with an end-to-end context and allocated performance requirements 

to humans, systems, and or subsystems. The operational performance assessment (OPA) began with 

required communication performance (RCP) and allocated these requirements to humans and technical 

components (e.g., equipment). The term required communication technical performance (RCTP) refers to 

the allocation to the technical components. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 55 

Performance requirements presented below resulted from the OPA conducted as part of the COCR. 

That OPA determined the performance a system or service must achieve and lead to determination of the 

availability, integrity, and transaction times. Performance requirements were driven by operational needs 

and safety requirements as well as other assessments (e.g., information security) to determine overall 

communication performance requirements. 

The more stringent of the safety objectives and operational requirements for each parameter was used 

to determine the communication performance requirements. The operational requirements are driven by 

the type of exchange (e.g., trajectory change and general information) and the domain in which the 

service was offered. 

Values in Table 14 are based on COCR ATS FRS performance requirements (Ref. 5) for the select 

services with the most stringent requirements presented. For example, the WAKE service is a driving 

service for defining the latency requirements in the airport, TMA, and en route domains. 

Performance requirements should be revisited at a later stage in system development process to 

reflect most current ConUse and services selection. 

TABLE 14.—L–DACS DATA REQUIREMENTS 

[Acronyms are defined in Appendix A.] 

Service type Confidentiality Latency (sec) Integrity Availability of 

provision APT TMA ENR AOA 

Addressed Medium 0.4 1.2 1.2 2.4 5.0×10–8 0.999995 

Broadcast Medium 1.4 1.4 2.4 2.4 5.0×10–8 0.999995 

4.6 L–DACS Spectrum Requirements 

One of the main objectives of the proposed L–DACS system is to increase communications system 

capacity. A channel plan will be developed driven by frequency availability to support broadband 

services. Interference studies proposed to be performed in the near future and the subsequent final 

technology selection will allow defining the channel plan. 

The proposed system should provide seamless operations around the globe. To achieve full 

interoperability, international standards are being developed. 

Table 15 summarizes NAS spectrum requirements applicable to the proposed L–DACS as 

documented in the NAS SR–1000 (Ref. 16). 

TABLE 15.—NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM (NAS) SPECTRUM REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO THE 

PROPOSED L–DACS 

[Numbers in the table are the requirements as they appear in Ref. 16] 

Category NAS Requirements 

Secure Spectrum with the Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA) 

The NAS shall secure and protect national radio spectrum for the FAA and the U.S. 

aviation community. (32470) 

The NAS shall coordinate national spectrum allocation programs. (19190) 

The NAS shall establish new systems spectrum development activities compatible 

with projected national use. (19290) 

Secure frequency for the FAA The NAS shall establish national frequency allocation programs. (19170) 

The NAS shall establish new systems frequency development activities compatible 

with current national use. (19230) 

The NAS shall establish new systems frequency development activities compatible 

with projected national use. (19270) 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 56 

TABLE 15.—NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM (NAS) SPECTRUM REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO THE 

PROPOSED L–DACS 

[Numbers in the table are the requirements as they appear in Ref. 16] 

Category NAS Requirements 

Secure international spectrum The NAS shall establish new systems spectrum development activities compatible 

with current national use. (19250) 

The NAS shall comply with national standards to avoid the interference of new 

systems with existing systems. (19310) 

The NAS shall coordinate national spectrum management assistance programs. 

(19210) 

The NAS shall disseminate en route navigational guidance such that ambiguities in 

guidance information have a minimal impact on NAS operations. (13960) 

Manage international spectrum The NAS shall comply with international standards to avoid the interference of new 

systems with existing systems. (32090) 

4.7 L–DACS User Requirements 

Table 16 summarizes aviation user requirements based on those documented in the RTCA DO–224B 

(Ref. 33) and found potentially applicable to the proposed system. 

TABLE 16.—AVIATION USER REQUIREMENTS 

The system shall be capable of supporting all categories of users including the following: 

1. Scheduled air transport carriers (including international, trunk, regional, commuter and air freight carriers) 

2. Nonscheduled air carriers 

3. General aviation (GA) (including operators of turbine-powered and reciprocating-engine aircraft); scheduled air transport 

carriers (including international, trunk, regional, commuter and air freight carriers) 

4. Nonscheduled air carriers 

5. General aviation (GA) (including operators of turbine-powered and reciprocating -engine aircraft) 

6. Rotorwing aircraft (including helicopters and gyrocraft) 

7. Unpowered aircraft (including gliders and lighter-than-air) 

8. Military aircraft 

9. Certain ground and maritime vehicles (e.g., airport service vehicles, those vehicles coordinating in a search-and-rescue 

mission) 

The system shall be capable of operation with appropriately equipped aircraft of all types and all flight regimes including at rest. 

There shall be no limitation imposed by the intrinsic characteristics of the ground system or the signal-in-space that limit suitable 

equipage of any type of aircraft or flight conditions,a,b

1. Relative aircraft velocities ±1,200 knots (two aircraft converging or diverging each at 600 knots) 

2. Relative ground speed 0 to 850 knots (600 knots aircraft plus 250 knots wind) 

3. Altitude ground level to 70,000 feet above mean sea level 

The new system shall satisfy any data communications requirements for use in any authorized category of communications 

service including air traffic services, ATS, aeronautical (airline) operational control , and aeronautical administrative 

communication. 

The avionics equipment shall communicate with any compatible ground system. The new system shall be capable of 

implementation and operation anywhere in the world. 

a

Relative aircraft velocity is important for air-to-air communications. 

b

Does not include requirements for extremely high-speed aircraft (e.g., hypersonic transport). 

 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 57 

4.8 Regulatory Requirements 

Table 17 summarizes regulatory requirements based on those documented in the RTCA DO–225 (Ref. 

19) and found potentially applicable to the proposed system. 

 TABLE 17.—REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS 

The system shall comply with AM(R)S spectrum allocation requirements. 

The system shall comply with the U.S. ATS and AOC service rules and regulations. 

The system shall comply with the U.S. Federal aviation regulations. 

The system shall support the requirements for message priority capability. 

4.9 Safety and Security Requirements Applicable to L–DACS 

The fundamental requirement is that the new system shall not cause a degradation in safety when 

compared with the existing A/G (or A/A, as applicable) communications system. The overall objective is 

to improve safety. Preliminary safety and security analysis and the associated requirements are covered in 

a separate document (Ref. 29). 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 58 

5.0 Synthesis (Physical Architecture) 

5.1 System Context 

The L–DACS architecture can be characterized at many levels. In accordance with U.S. Government 

policy, all Government agencies, including the FAA, have developed an enterprise architecture (EA). Of 

most relevance to this report is the NAS EA, which relates to activities that support operational air traffic 

services. The NAS EA contains architecture products and views that describe the current NAS “portfolio” 

of infrastructure and services, the 2025 far-term and 2018 mid-term target architectures, and roadmaps to 

reach the target architectures. Some examples of the NAS EA views have been depicted in Section 3.0 of 

this report. 

Figure 25 shows the NextGen 2025 System Interface Description SV–1p depicting airborne and 

ground components in the context of the NAS EA. System elements are presented depicting their 

functionality. A/G communications is shown as an enabler of various NAS services facilitating 

surveillance, weather, flight management, and other data exchange. 

Figure 25.—National Airspace System enterprise architecture airborne elements and remote facilities (Ref. 18). 

Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. 

The L–DACS functionality presented in this document nominally corresponds to the A/G 

communications links shown on the left of Figure 25; however, it might serve as a link for other services 

shown on the figure. The L–DACS architecture, as it matures, may be incorporated into the NAS EA. The 

high-level L–DACS architecture presented in this document might serve as a high-level entry point for 

EA incorporation. 

5.2 Synthesis Process 

Figure 26 depicts recommended steps for requirements and architecture development as described in 

the SEM. It should be noted, however, that the FCS technology assessments leading to candidate 

technologies recommendations were conducted before formal system requirements, ConUse, and 

architecture were developed. As such, the development of L–DACS candidate technologies L–DACS1 

and L–DACS2, to a certain extent, might dictate a reverse-engineering approach to be taken for 

developing the proposed system architecture to assure tractability in the technology selection process. It is 

recommended that this approach be considered as part of future U.S. and European coordination activities 

in the L–DACS technology downselection process. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 59 

Figure 26.—System requirements and architecture development synthesis loop (Ref. 8). 

The synthesis element typically defines design solutions and systems that satisfy program 

requirements. At least one iteration of that process has been completed and is reflected in the FCS 

technology assessment reports. Another aspect of synthesis—“translating the requirements, as set in 

context by the functional architecture, into the design architecture, consisting of the physical architecture 

with its associated technical requirements” (Ref. 8)—is covered in this report. 

5.3 L–DACS Physical Architecture 

An L–DACS physical architecture can be derived from and represents a technical solution to the 

functional architecture and requirements. It represents “a hierarchical arrangement of hardware and/or 

software components along with associated interfaces depicting the physical definition of the system. 

Lower level Functional Analysis work is constrained by a higher level physical architecture” (Ref. 8). 

Figure 27 shows a high-level architecture of the L–DACS system supporting A/G communication. 

The ground infrastructure comprises of a number of L–DACS ground radio stations, each providing a 

cell-like coverage area, and which are geographically situated to provide overlapping coverage (using 

different frequencies) to achieve seamless cell handovers. Each ground radio station would be connected 

to some G/G network through some ground network interface (GNI) (no. 1 in the figure). 

 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 60 

Figure 27.—L–DACS architecture. Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. 

The L–DACS architecture can be further decomposed as shown in Figure 27, which depicts the 

components of an L–DACS ground station. The components shown in the figure, with the exception of 

the ground station infrastructure (e.g., power, heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC), and 

antenna towers), would be responsible for providing the functions identified in 0 and meeting L–DACS 

functional and performance requirements identified in Section 4.0. 

This architecture is necessarily presented at a high level because the L–DACS ConUse so far are very 

broad in scope. Most of the high-level functional and performance requirements identified in Section 4.0 

cannot be readily allocated to the components shown in Figure 27 and Figure 28. More specifically 

defined ConUse and associated scenarios would make it more appropriate to further decompose the 

requirements and allow allocation of specific requirements to specific architecture components. This 

activity is recommended for Phase II of Task 7. 

Figure 28.—L–DACS ground station components.

Aircraft

ATSP Facility

End System Interface/

Gateway

G/G 

Network

Ground 

Station

Radio 

System

End 

System

User 

Controls/

Displays

2

3

4

5

7

Interface Description

1 GS to G/G Network

2 GS to GS Antenna

3 GS Antenna RF Interface

4 A/C Antenna RF Interface

5 A/C Radio to A/C Antenna

6 A/C Radio to A/C End 

System

7 A/C Radio to A/C 

Controls/Displays

6

1

L-DACS Physical 

Architecture

Ground 

Station

Ground 

Station

Ground 

Station

Transceiver

Subsystem

Processing

Subsystem

Antenna

Subsystem

Network

Interface

Ground 

Station 

Infrastructure
NASA/CR—2010-216326 61 

6.0 Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) 

6.1 Unmanned Aircraft System Operations 

The RTCA Issue Paper SC203-CC01110 describes the characteristics of the current UAS control and 

communications (CC) data links. The main attributes of the current UAS would apply to the proposed 

system as well when services are provided over the L–DACS and as such are detailed below. 

 Most current UAS are equipped with line-of-site (LOS) control data links. UA with more 

autonomy (e.g., automatic takeoff and landing) rely less on the LOS system for takeoff and 

landing, since the pilot is not “in-the-loop” (actively flying the aircraft) but “on-the-loop” 

(monitoring the flight of the aircraft with the capability to override preprogrammed maneuvers if 

needed). However, such systems will still require LOS control data links. The level of reliance on 

the LOS system is reflected in the level of control data link redundancy and low latency adopted 

by different UAS. Most pilot in-the-loop takeoff and landing UAS use dual redundant data links 

and have low pilot-control-input-to-pilot-observable-response latencies since the pilot is actively 

maneuvering the aircraft in real time. Conversely, pilot on-the-loop systems often only have 

single-thread LOS data links and higher latencies because the pilot is not in real-time control of 

the takeoff or landing maneuvers. Dual redundant LOS control data links offer the advantage of 

having two sets of data link equipment significantly improving the overall mean time between 

failures (MTBF) of the data link. The two links can also offer improved data link availability. For 

example, if one of the links is temporarily suffering degradation, due to interference or 

propagation-related effects, then the other link in a different frequency band could take over the 

delivery of telecommands and telemetry, since interference and propagation effects are not 

correlated for the two links. 

Both links could be provided over the L–DACS. 

 Some current UAS are equipped with BLOS UA control systems. Most are satellite-based, 

offering wide geographical coverage and allowing the aircraft to be controlled thousands of miles 

away from its takeoff and landing location. While most takeoff and landing activity is controlled 

using the LOS systems, at a manufacturer-specific altitude or range, the UAS is switched from 

LOS to BLOS control and is usually flown this way for the bulk of the distant flight activity. The 

pilot using the LOS system to control the aircraft does not necessarily have to be the same pilot 

controlling the aircraft using the BLOS system. A LOS system will again be used for landing, but 

not necessarily the same one that was used for takeoff. This allows the UA to make landings at 

distant locations and also allows for pilot relief. To enhance link availability when using satellite 

communications, current UAS that fly BLOS missions often utilize two or three different satellite 

communications systems, all operating in parallel. Typically, the flight computer on the aircraft 

and the computer in the control station simultaneously monitor all links and choose, on a realtime basis, the best link as appropriate. This link choice can also be manually controlled by the 

pilot. 

The proposed L–DACS will not offer BLOS communication; these links will remain satellitebased. 

 Not all current UA carry voice communication equipment. However, all UAS have the ability 

for their pilot to have voice communication with air traffic controllers and pilots of other aircraft. 

 

10 This section is adopted from Ref. 34. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 62 

Current UA that are equipped only for LOS flights often have their VHF voice transceivers 

located in their control stations. This is adequate when the control-station based VHF transceiver 

can maintain voice communication with the controlling ATC entity; however, for BLOS 

operation this is unacceptable. For present-day BLOS missions, the VHF voice communication 

equipment must be carried on the aircraft so the pilot can communicate with various ATC centers 

or pilots as the aircraft transits different regions. In current BLOS UAS the voice traffic is carried 

(along with the telecommands and telemetry) as part of the overall data link between the control 

station and the aircraft. Most of the VHF voice equipment currently used for both LOS and BLOS 

systems is standard equipment covered by current technical standard orders (TSOs). However, the 

method for monitoring the voice traffic between the pilot and the VHF equipment, when it is 

carried by the aircraft flying a BLOS mission, is not specifically covered by current regulations. 

It should be noted that while the proposed L–DACS could support voice communication, only 

data communication was planned over the L-band for manned aircraft. 

 As all mobile radio communication systems, those used on UA, are designed to achieve a specific 

level of performance and under certain conditions could become temporarily unavailable. 

Typically, given the statistical nature of the situation, the data links will return to full 

functionality. The amount of time a particular UA can operate without its data links is dependent 

on its design and level of autonomy, but after a certain amount of time without a data link all 

systems must declare that the link is lost. The vast majority of UA have built in procedures to 

accommodate lost link situations. Again, the level of autonomy plays a major part in what the UA 

does after losing its link, but in most cases the aircraft will fly a preplanned maneuver trying to 

reestablish any data link that might be available while making its way to a precoordinated 

location where it can be picked up again by the LOS system located at that facility. Transponderequipped UA may set their transponders to squawk certain codes as part of their lost link 

procedure. 

Lost link procedures will need to be developed for the proposed L-band system. 

 Although the Department of Defense (DoD) uses a variety of frequencies for its UAS CC data 

links (operating in predominantly restricted airspace), no frequency bands are currently allocated 

specifically for unmanned aircraft use in the NAS. Current UAS Spectrum Usage includes a 

wide range of frequency bands for control of the UA. Systems operate on frequencies ranging 

from VHF (72 MHz) up to Ka-band (27 to 40 GHz). The factors driving the choice of frequency 

are related to limiting the size, weight and power of the airborne data link equipment—

particularly antennas and power amplifiers—as well as data rates required. Many BLOS systems 

share the control link and the payload return link on one common carrier so the wide bandwidth 

needs of the payload return link may drive this choice more than the lower data-rate needs of the 

control link. 

Spectrum provision for CC is essential for the safe operation of UA and their integration in the 

NAS. Appendix E discusses UAS spectrum requirements for the proposed L–DACS. Appendix F 

contains the details of the L–DACS applicability to UAS applications. 

 Various messages are carried on the CC links to deliver information exchanges that ensure 

safe, reliable, and effective UA flight operation. The functions of the data link can be related to 

the following types of information that are exchanged: 

– Telecommand messages: These messages are used for flight control and task execution and 

usually have higher priority than other message types. They include aerodynamic control 

messages, power plant control messages, and messages associated with changing the status of 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 63 

the avionics (e.g., frequency of the VHF ATC radio) or aircraft (e.g., raise and lower the 

landing gear). 

– Nonpayload telemetry data: Telemetry data is sent from the UA to the control station and can 

include a broad range of information. The first type of information relates to the flight 

characteristics of the UA. This data includes items such as position, flight trajectory, altimeter 

setting, altitude, heading, speed, route clearance, and arrival time. The pilot uses this data to 

maintain full awareness of the flight of the UA and to determine the changes needed to ensure 

safe flight. The second type of information relates to the health and status of UA. Health and 

status data provides critical information about the condition of the subsystems, sensors, and 

hardware of the UA. The pilot at the control station uses this information to maintain full 

awareness of the ability of the UA to function and to diagnose problems. The pilot can then 

handle potential or actual problems by taking preventive measures or corrective actions to 

ensure continued functioning and thus safe flight. The third type of information relates to 

situation awareness data. This type of data describes the operational environment of a UA. 

Examples of this data are weather conditions and terrain information. 

– Navigation aids: Pilot-to-UA uplink that enables the pilot to control the settings of the UA’s 

navigation receivers, and the UA-to-pilot downlink that carries data from those receivers to 

the pilot’s display. 

– ATC voice relay: Spectrum is required for relaying (via the UA) voice message traffic 

between air traffic controllers and the pilot. 

– ATS data relay: A nationwide system providing ATS data services of various kinds is 

expected to be in place by the 2020s. It seems likely that the messages associated with those 

services will need to be relayed to and from the pilot via the UA. 

– Target-track data: Essential sources of target-track data will include: 

 The sense-and-avoid (S&A) system (whose architecture is still undefined) 

 traffic information services, broadcast (TIS–B) 

 Automatic dependent surveillance (ADS)–broadcast (ADS–B) 

 ADS–rebroadcast (ADS–R) 

 ADS–contract (ADS–C) 

– Nonpayload video downlink data: This data erves to enhance the pilot’s situational 

awareness, especially during takeoff and landing. 

The types of messages discussed above apply to the proposed L-band system. As noted earlier, 

voice communication is not currently considered for the manned aircraft applications and 

therefore was not the focus of prior FCSs. 

 The capacity of the CC links used on current UAS is proprietary to the link manufacturer. 

However, a survey of publicly available literature indicates that data rates ranging from 1200 bps 

to 200 kbps are successfully used today to control UA. 

To date, UA operations have been limited to segregated airspace.11 Studies are being conducted to 

determine the implications of operating UAS in nonsegregated airspace. Currently, UAS use in the NAS 

 

11 As noted in the proposed changes to Annex 16 of 5B/296-E in Ref. 35, the following definitions of types of 

airspaces were adopted in this document: 

 ATC separation assurance—Air traffic control is responsible for safe separation of all aircraft. This 

comprises Classes A, B, and, if the UAS is operated in accordance with instrument flight rules (IFR), 

Class C. 

 Limited or no ATC separation assurance—Air traffic control is not responsible for safe separation of 

all airspace users. This comprises Classes D, E, F, and G. 

 Segregated—A defined volume of airspace reserved for exclusive use of a particular user. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 64 

is restricted to operating under a certificate of authorization, providing it a special waiver for conducting a 

flight in the NAS. 

6.2 Need for Change and Impact on Existing Unmanned Aircract System Operations 

Application of UAS is anticipated to increase over the next decade and beyond, ranging from small 

local surveillance aircraft to large, unmanned, transoceanic freight carriers. These systems offer low-cost 

alternatives to manned aircraft applications and present numerous applications opportunities. At the same 

time, the volume and variety of systems pose new challenges to the airspace management and ATC 

infrastructure. 

Challenges associated with the addition of unmanned aircraft vary from those similar to manned 

aircraft to UAS specific. Various performance characteristics and different moving patterns—manned 

aircraft typically go from one location to another, UAS may stay over one location for an extensive period 

of time—may affect existing NAS operations. This, in turn, would affect departure and arrival and ATC 

procedures including A/G and A/A communication. As noted in the RTCA DO–304 (Ref. 37), UAS must 

be able to respond to ATC instructions without degrading the NAS safety any more than a response to a 

manned aircraft, dictating the performance requirements for the communication links, including latency 

requirement between the UAS and a remote pilot, compatibility with existing systems, and so on. 

In support of spectrum selection and allocation, the SC–203 conducted a comparative analysis of 

various frequency bands rating them in respect to suitability for UAS applications (in Ref. 35). A 

relatively high rating was assigned to a lower part of the L-band (960 to 1024 MHz). 

Further analysis of industry papers and related ITU–R activities should be conducted to assess the 

latest spectrum recommendations for UAS communications. This activity is recommended for Phase II. 

6.3 Unmanned Aircaft System ConUse and Functional Analysis 

Figure 29 shows the architectural framework leading to operational functions analysis, as adopted by 

SC–203. 

Figure 29.—High-level unmanned aircraft operational functions (Ref. 36). 

As defined by the RTCA DO–304 (Ref. 36), the communicate functions involve data and information 

exchange between the UAS and entities external to UAS, including ATC and non-ATC. Control and 

contingency functions cut across the boundaries of all three basic functions (aviate, navigate, and 

communicate). The control functions involve data and information exchange between the UA and control 

segments of UAS, networking, data bus protocols, and related issues covering internal data and 

information exchange within a UAS segment. Contingency functions involve procedures or programmed 

operation that provide for a predictable behavior in the event of system failure such as loss of control link. 

The RTCA DO–304, Appendix F, contains a table correlating functional allocation and operations 

depicted in Figure 29 to systems (e.g., during preflight phase, route planning, the communications 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 65 

function would be used to check spectrum availability and coverage for intended flight and for all 

alternate locations.) (Ref. 36). 

In an ongoing effort to find an RF spectrum to support the CC12 links of UAS, UAS L-band is being 

considered as one of the possible systems to support UAS operations. 

The proposed communication system should be designed and implemented to support a seamless 

integration of UAS operations into current ATC procedures while maintaining the required safety-offlight levels. 

For safe operations of UA under LOS and BLOS conditions, three functions of radio communications 

between UA and the control station (CS) are to be supported:13

 ATC Relay 

The link (the downlink bringing the ATC information to the CS and the uplink allowing the 

remote pilot to communicate with ATC) between air traffic control and the CS via the UA will 

relay all ATC and A/A communications received and transmitted by the UA in nonsegregated 

airspace. For communicating with ATC, the UA will use the same equipment as a manned 

aircraft. 

 Command and Control 

The link will provide a two-way communication between the CS and the UA. The uplink will be 

used to send commands to the aircraft for navigation purposes. This is the command link that 

would probably necessitate low data rates. The downlink will be used to send the flight status of 

the UA to the remote pilot. It is anticipated that in some flight conditions or in specific airspaces 

it could be necessary to downlink video streams. Such a requirement could lead to data rates of 

several hundreds of kbps per UA. 

In areas under the responsibility of the aeronautical authorities, it is expected that 

the Command and Control communications will have to be compliant with 

ICAO standards to be further specified on this function. Nevertheless, in the 

periods where the UA will follow a full autonomous flight, the up and down C2 

[Command and Control] links could have very weak rates or be temporarily 

disrupted.14

 Sense and Avoid 

This function is analogues with the piloting principle “see-and-avoid” used in all air space 

volumes where a pilot is responsible for ensuring separation from nearby aircraft, terrain and 

obstacles (e.g., weather). 

The system will support a two-way communication between the remote pilot and the UA. The 

uplink will allow the remote pilot to control the operation of this function according to the 

conditions of the flight likely requiring high bit rates. The downlink from the UAV to the CS or 

remote pilot will provide an indication that the function operates as desired. The necessity to send 

 

12 The RTCA UAS Spectrum document limits the term “CC” to nonpayload links intended primarily to 

ensure the safety and regularity of UA flight. Payload applications such as the downlinking of 

surveillance data for non-safety purposes were excluded from the scope and not considered in estimating 

nationwide CC bandwidth requirements or evaluating candidate spectral bands. 

13 Based on the research documented in the proposed changes to Ref. 35. 

14 Based on the research documented in the proposed changes to Ref. 35. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 66 

video streams must be considered avoiding duplication between command and control and senseand-avoid video downlinks. 

Similarly to the command and control considerations, it is expected that the 

“S&A data” [Sense and Avoid data] RF communication requirements will have 

to be compliant with future ICAO standards for the safe flight of the UA in areas 

under the responsibility of the aviation authorities.15

Thus, the three functions above can be further decomposed to show the following classes of LOS 

communications traffic to be supported by the proposed L-band system: 

 Pilot/UA control links, including telecommand and telemetry 

 Pilot/UA NavAids data exchanges 

 Relaying ATC voice messages to and from UA pilots 

 Relaying ATS data messages to and from UA pilots 

 UA-to-pilot downlinking of non-payload target track data 

 UA-to-pilot downlinking of data from UA-borne weather radars 

 UA-to-pilot downlinking of safety-related video data from UA to pilots 

 UA-to-pilot downlinking of safety-related sense and avoid automated decisionmaking from UA 

to pilots 

The proposed system is to support a handover to transfer. 

 A direct (LOS) RF communication to one dedicated CS16 to another (LOS) dedicated CS 

 A direct (LOS) to an indirect (BLOS) RF communication link or vice versa 

6.4 Unmanned Aircraft System Applications 

Both commercial and Government applications could be provided over the L-band system. As 

defined by the ITU17 and illustrated in Figure 30, commercial applications would provide services that are 

sold by contractors in the course of carrying out normal business operations, while Governmental 

applications ensure public safety by addressing different emergencies and involve issues of public interest 

and include scientific matters. 

 

15 Based on the research documented in the proposed changes to Ref. 35. 

16 CS (Control Station)—One or more facilities or devices from which a UA is controlled remotely as 

defined in Proposed changes to Annex 16 of 5B/296-E in Ref. 35. 

17 Based on the research documented in the proposed changes to Ref. 35. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 67 

Figure 30.—Unmanned aircraft system applications (from proposed changes to Ref. 35). 

6.5 Operational Scenarios 

Example operational scenarios for each type of application are presented in Table 18. Additional 

scenarios and detail can be found in Reference 37. 

TABLE 18.—UAS OPERATIONAL SCENARIOS 

[From proposed changes to Ref. 35.] 

Mission type Scenario description 

Movie making, sports games, popular events like concerts

Cargo planes with reduced manning (one-man-cockpit)

Inspections for industries (e.g., oil fields, oil platforms, oil pipelines, power line, rail line)

Provision of airborne relays for cell phones in the future

Commercial agricultural services like crop dusting

Earth science and geographic missions (e.g., mapping and surveying or aerial photography) and 

biological and environmental missions (e.g., animal monitoring, crop spraying, volcano monitoring, 

biomass surveys, livestock monitoring, or tree fertilization)

Coastline inspection, preventive border surveillance, drug control, anti-terrorism operations, strike events, 

search-and-rescue of people in distress, public interest missions (e.g.,remote weather monitoring, avalanche 

prediction and control, hurricane monitoring, forest fires prevention surveillance, insurance claims during 

disasters, and traffic surveillance)

Famine relief, medical support, aid delivery. Search and Rescue activities.
NASA/CR—2010-216326 68 

6.6 Unmanned Aircraft System Requirements 

6.6.1 Spectrum Requirements 

Based on the research conducted by the ITU,18 a terrestrial LOS UAS system would require 34 MHz 

of spectrum.19 (Refer to Appendix E that presents Sections 5.0 and 6.0 (Spectrum requirements for UAS 

communications and Conclusions) of Ref. 35 for details.) 

6.6.2 Safety and Latency Requirements 

RTCA DO–304 (Ref. 36) notes the additional operational complexity associated with the UA. Unlike 

in manned aircraft operation, a pilot is remote from the aircraft with different people at potentially 

dispersed locations engaged in subsets of operation adding latency to aircraft operation. 

Safe operations of future UAs in non-segregated airspace could need independent backup communications.

A UA designed to fly in controlled airspace must be able to operate in both high and low 

density airspace. The air traffic control system would not necessarily be able to restrict it 

to low density airspace only. Hence 

 It is recommended that larger UAs be equipped with a terrestrial link capability 

wherever possible. 

 A UA may use a GEO satellite link in low density sectors and probably in high 

density sectors where the total number of UAs in that sector is low. 

The impact of latency on UAS command and control systems is a prime factor when 

considering the safety of operations. Latency will be of the utmost importance when 

establishing a safety case for the operation of UAs, particularly in non-segregated 

airspace. Current air traffic management relies heavily on voice communications 

although information via data links is being progressively implemented. Hence new 

operational requirements for the future data link environment will also need to be 

developed (Ref. 35). 

6.6.3 Other Requirements 

The COCR Version 2.0 (Ref. 5) does not specifically address the requirements to support UAS 

command and control links (i.e., telecommand and telemetry). It does note that (Ref. 5): 

[a]ll other communications services with UASs are considered to be the same as those 

with manned aircraft, i.e., UAS operation is transparent for the ATM system. In the 

future, in some parts of the world, the number of these vehicles may represent a large 

portion of an Air Traffic Service Unit’s (ATSU’s) traffic load. When providing ATS to a 

UAS, this may involve the relay of communication and execution instructions to and 

from a remote pilot; however, operational performance requirements between an ATSU 

and an UAS remain the same as those between an ATSU and any manned aircraft. 

It should also be noted that UAS vary widely in their design and capabilities. This, in turn, would 

affect communication system requirements. 

 

18 Assumptions and results presented in proposed changes to Annex 16 of 5B/296-E in Ref. 35. 

19 The total UAS spectrum requirements are: 34 MHz for a terrestrial LOS system; 49 MHz for a spot-beam satellite 

system; 169 MHz for a regional-beam satellite system, which can be shared between several satellites, thereby 

reducing the overall spectrum requirement.
NASA/CR—2010-216326 69 

6.7 Additional Safety Considerations and Assumptions 

As noted in the RTCA DO–304 (Ref. 36), the basic premise underling all the assumptions is that the 

existing NAS is safe and UAS should integrate safely into the existing NAS structure, complying with the 

rules and requirements placed on current NAS users. 

Communication safety and security controls should assure that 

 A human pilot is always in control of an UA while it is operating. 

 UAS complies with ATC procedures and instructions while in ATC. 

 Prevention procedures are in place for unauthorized assumption of control. 

 Security of the control and communication links between the UA and control station is provided. 

 Requirements and contingency procedures are in place that UAS would follow in the event of 

control link failure, loss of traffic control communication, or flight termination. 

 UAS must have the ability to determine whether the link is temporarily failed or truly lost to 

initiate procedural loss link safeguards (Ref. 36). 

 The contingency procedures may include a code for lost link control, preprogrammed 

contingency flight path for UA to follow, a way for the pilot to communication the expected 

behavior of the UA to the controller, and a fail-safe way to terminate the flight without hazard to 

public safety (Ref. 36). 

 UAS communication link is compatible with other communication systems. This involves: 

– Mitigation of interference with unintentional continuous transmissions 

– Other collision-avoidance systems used by the existing users of NAS 

6.8 Unmanned Aircraft System Architecture and Interfaces 

A notional system architecture consisting of three segments and the associated internal and external 

interfaces are shown in Figure 31. The detailed description as well as notional diagrams of each segment 

can be found in RTCA DO–304 (Ref. 36) and are not replicated here. 

Figure 31.—Unmanned aircraft system (UAS) notional architecture (Ref. 36). Acronyms are defined in Appendix A.
NASA/CR—2010-216326 70 

7.0 Preliminary Inputs to L–DACS Design 

7.1 Scope 

Section 6.0 presents a Task 7–2E deliverable. This subtask was intended as a set of support activities 

conducted in cooperation with the FAA’s European partners leading the L-band Future Communications 

System development. 

Subsections 7.2.1 and 7.2.2 below outline current EUROCONTROL and FAA long-term plans 

regarding the L-band communications system research and development. Due to changes in the proposed 

European partners’ schedule, some of the activities planned to be completed and detailed in this document 

were not included in this task. Specifically, an interference analysis and the development of a joint 

interference testing program have been postponed until corresponding European L-band activities resume. 

Additionally, further refinement of the upper layers of the L–DACS1 protocol stack has been postponed. 

Both of the originally proposed technologies: L–DACS1 and L–DACS2 are still being considered for 

L-band system application; findings presented here are technology independent. 

Based on discussions and guidance/direction received from the FAA and NASA, Task 7–2E 

deliverable provides an assessment of L–DACS implementation/transition issues noting various factors 

that may affect the development process and is combined with the 7–2A and 7–2B deliverables. 

Inputs to design specifications are limited to the outputs from the previous analyses presented in the 

ConUse, System Performance Requirements and Architecture sections of this document and the L-band 

System Engineering Preliminary Safety and Security Risk Assessment and Mitigation (deliverable 7–2D) 

as well as those completed prior to Task 7. 

EUROCONTROL/FAA Telecons were held on a regular basis as part of the subtask 7–2E scope. 

Updates to the L-band system research and development schedule, as appropriate, are included in this 

document. 

7.2 L–DACS Implementation and Transition Issues 

7.2.1 L-Band System Development Objectives (FAA Long-Term Plans) 

The 2007 World Radio Communications Conference (WRC-07) approved adding an AM(R)S 

allocation for 960 to 1164 MHz to the International Table of Frequency Allocations. The proposed band 

is to be used for an L–DACS for terrestrial en route communications as part of the FCI. This assignment 

assumes a co-allocation on a noninterfering basis with Aeronautical Radio Navigation Systems (ARNS) 

in the same band, primarily distance measuring equipment (DME). Consequently, further interference 

studies and technology analysis are required to assure compliance with this requirement. 

The joint FAA/EUROCONTROL AP–17 completed in 2007 resulted in the following 

recommendations to complete investigations for selection of L-band datalink (Ref. 20): 

 Refine and agree on the interference environment and assumptions for the L-band compatibility 

investigations 

 Complete the investigation of compatibility of prototyped L–DACS components with existing 

systems in the L-band particularly with regard to the onboard cosite interference and agree on the 

overall design characteristics 

 Evaluate and validate the performance of the proposed solution in the relevant environments 

through trials and test bed development 

 Considering the design tradeoffs, propose the appropriate L–DACS solution for input to a global 

aeronautical standardization activity 

Accordingly, the FAA NextGen plan for 2009 (Ref. 10) included the following milestone activities: 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 71 

 Developing ConUse, preliminary requirements, and architecture for L-band terrestrial 

communication system 

 Developing an L-band communications system prototype to enable validation of proposed 

standard 

Due to fewer spectrum constraints in the United States than in Europe for A/G communications, the 

L-band work in the United States was determined to be a lower priority compared with the other future 

communications components, with the L-band technology likely supporting far-term applications. 

Because system capacity and spectrum saturation appears to be a more pressing issue in Europe, the need 

for an L-band system is more prevalent in that region. As such, FAA has assumed a support role to the 

EUROCONTROL efforts in respect to the L-band activities. 

The first FY2009 NextGen milestone activity noted above will be met with the deliverables provided 

under Task 7, including this document, by developing L–DACS ConUse, requirements, and architecture 

for potential domestic en route applications in the NextGen timeframes. This document will serve as part 

of the second milestone activity. Its full execution will be postponed and will depend on the 

EUROCONTROL L-band system development plan and schedule. 

Figure 11 depicts the FAA Communications roadmap with the proposed L-band system currently 

identified as a long-term research and development project. 

As Data Comm is fully engaged in the development of VDL Mode 2 capabilities s of the time of this 

study, the FAA will follow the EUROCONTROL lead in L-band system development and provide 

support under the pending AP–30 FCI work plan in conducting the research and technology development 

for the FCI based on the ICAO endorsed findings and recommendations of the AP–17 FCS. Activities 

may include, but will not be limited to 

 Supporting joint FAA/EUROCONTROL development and evaluation of the L–DACS system 

concepts, specifications, and prototype 

 Co-developing a joint interference testing program 

 Refining the upper layers of the L–DACS protocol stack 

These activities will be highly dependent on cooperative planning with the European L-DACS 

team(s) and their schedule. 

7.2.2 Technology Evaluation (EUROCONTROL Long-Term Plans) 

Various candidate technologies were considered and evaluated for their support of the future 

aeronautical requirements under EUROCONTROL/FAA AP–17. Several L-band technologies were 

identified as candidates to support future en route communication due to favorable propagation 

characteristics and because of spectrum congestion in the VHF band. 

Technology selection remains one of the primary goals in L-band system development. Various 

technologies for continental systems were analyzed during the AP–17 activities. None of the considered 

technologies were fully recommended primarily due to concerns about the operational compatibility 

(spectrum interference) with existing systems in the L-band and/or because of lack of sufficient technical 

maturity. The assessment of the candidate technologies did lead to the identification of desirable 

technology features to be used as a basis for the development of a spectrally compatible L-band data link 

solution. The resulting best candidates are described as follows: 

Considering these features and the most promising candidates, two options for the 

L-band Digital Aeronautical Communication System (L–DACS) were identified. These 

options need further consideration before final selection of a single data link technology. 

The first option for LDACS is a frequency division duplex (FDD) configuration utilizing 

OFDM modulation techniques, reservation based access control and advanced network 

protocols. This solution is a derivative of the B–AMC and TIA–902 (P34) technologies. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 72 

The second LDACS option is a time division duplex (TDD) configuration utilizing a 

binary modulation derivative of the implemented UAT system (CPFSK family) and of 

existing commercial (e.g., GSM) systems and custom protocols for lower layers 

providing high quality-of-service management capability. This solution is a derivative of 

the LDL and AMACS technologies. The following table depicts the key characteristics of 

the two options. 

The LDACS1 option represents the state of the art in the commercial developments 

employing modern modulation techniques and may lead to utilisation/adaptation of 

commercial products and standards. The LDACS2 option capitalises on experience from 

aviation specific systems and standards such as the VDL3, VDL4 and UAT. 

In addition to the air/ground capability, some of the assessed technologies could also 

support additional features such as air/air (point to point and/or broadcast) 

communications and digital voice. However the support of these capabilities needs 

further investigation. The L band data link investigations were primarily based on 

simulations and analytical investigations. Therefore there is the need to validate the 

theoretical findings and confirm expected performances using real equipment. (Ref. 38) 

Table 4 illustrates the proposed L–DACS options. 

In line with the AP–17 follow-on activities to further characterize the proposed L–DACS options, 

validate their performance, and lead to a single technology recommendation for the L-band (Ref. 38), 

the SESAR Definition Phase recommended expediting the development and validation of 

the L band selected technology by developing initial prototypes to support feasibility 

assessment. Furthermore, it recommended making final technology selection in 

coordination with other regions by 2010, to allow the development of the technical 

specifications for inclusion in ICAO SARPs and Manuals.

Figure 32 presents the schedule for completing the selection of L-band technology as presented in 

September 2009. 

Figure 32.—EUROCONTROL L-band technology selection schedule (September) (Ref. 39). 

It should be noted that an earlier plan for L–DACS-related activities, as documented in 

Ref. 40, included 2010 instead of 2011 as completion of testing and evaluation and 

beginning of L–DACS selection. 

SESAR JU

WP15

?

ICAO

ECTL

LDACS1/2

specifications

Interference Scenarios,

Criteria and Testing Plan

Development of

LDACS1/2

TX prototype

Development of

LDACS1/2

RX prototype

Testing and

Evaluation

LDACS

selection

2009 2011?
NASA/CR—2010-216326 73 

To complete the selection of the L–DACS, the detailed specifications for L–DACS1 and L–DACS2 

were to be developed in 2009 along with interference scenarios, compatibility criteria, and a testing plan. 

These activities were proposed to be followed by SESAR joint undertaking (JU) prototype development, 

testing, and evaluation in to assess the overall performance of L–DACS1 and L–DACS2 systems. The 

selection of the most appropriate system could then be considered in a global framework involving ICAO. 

Figure 12 in Section 3.0 shows the target schedule for expedited L–DACS development as presented 

in the AP–17 final report in November 2007 (Ref. 20). 

This schedule was initially used by the FAA to plan its support activities, especially those related to 

interference assessment and testing. 

At this time, one or more prototypes for L–DACS systems are still being developed. While the 

activities proposed earlier are still planned, their execution is delayed. As noted above, due to current 

inactivity of European partners, FAA schedule and activities have been adjusted accordingly. 

Figure 33 depicts a communication navigation surveillance/air traffic management (CNS/ATM) 

roadmap as presented in European Air Traffic Management Master Plan (Ref. 41). 

The L-band system is identified as providing capability level 4 to complement VDL–2, in support of 

more demanding services. It is proposed to allow moving from airspace to trajectory-based operations. 

The required research and development tasks include 

 Developing and validating A/G architecture for the new L-band link 

 Assessing and supporting consolidation of European-wide spectrum requirements 

 Developing and validating the selection of the technology for the future terrestrial L-band 

datalink by developing initial prototypes to support feasibility assessment 

 By 2010, in coordination with other regions (e.g., United States), making final technology 

selection to allow the development of the technical specifications to be included in ICAO SARPS 

and manual 

It should be noted that while system implementation is not proposed to start until 2016 with the R&D 

shown beginning 2013, technology selection is still planned to be completed by 2010. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 74 

Figure 33.—SESAR CNS systems and infrastructure roadmap (Ref. 41). Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. 

7.2.3 L-Band System Implementation 

The COCR identifies two phases of implementation of operational service capabilities. The first 

phase is based on existing or emerging data communications services and is scheduled to be completed 

around 2020. Initial steps under this phase are currently being implemented. During the second phase data 

communications is to become the primary means of A/G communication supporting increased automation 

in the aircraft and on the ground. 

The L-band system is proposed to be introduced during the second phase of FRS implementation. It 

should support A/G as well as A/A communications. A/A communications would be considered a second 

stage following the A/G communications implementation. 

While data communication is a primary objective for the proposed system, digital voice may be 

considered in the future set of capabilities. 

Figure 34 shows the communications links included for the planned L-band system. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 75 

Figure 34.—Proposed L-band communications system capabilities. 

In Figure 34 

 Fixed-to-mobile communications includes links to aircraft in the air as well as on the ground (to 

be implemented at the first stage, shown in blue). 

 Mobile-to-mobile communications applies to aircraft in the air (second stage, shown in green). 

No mobile-to-mobile services are currently identified involving aircraft on the ground. 

 L-band communications system is proposed to support UAS. Fixed-to-mobile application(s) 

involving unmanned aircraft may be implemented at the same time as other fixed-to-mobile 

services or independently (shown in orange). Mobile-to-mobile UAS to be implemented at the 

later stage (shown in green). 

 Mobile-to-mobile and mobile-to-fixed communications do not include vehicles other than 

aircraft. 

 Mobile-to-mobile (A/A) communications could be broadcast or addressed. Management 

questions are still to be resolved for addressed communications. Addressed communications 

implementation may require further development of various network layers. 

 Fixed-to-fixed communication is not supported by the proposed system. 

7.2.4 L-Band System Transition Issues 

The L-band system is part of the long-term aeronautical communication plan and is unlikely to be 

implemented in the short term or midterm, even in Europe. However, transition issues need to be 

identified early in the system development process to assure they are properly addressed by the time of 

system deployment. Since the system will be implemented after many other NextGen components are 

already in place (e.g., DataComm and C-band aeronautical mobile airport communications system, or 

AeroMACS20), it will have an advantage of benefiting from the work and lessons learned during prior 

transitions. 

As noted in the NextGen Task Force Midterm report (Ref. 42), at this time 

 

20 AeroMACS is a proposed term for the C-band airport surface communication technology based on the 

IEEE 802.16e standard 

Planesin the air

Planes on

the ground

Unmanned

Aircraft

Non‐aircraft

Mobiles

Fixed Stations
NASA/CR—2010-216326 76 

the NextGen Task Force is focusing on the difficult transition issues that must be 

addressed to achieve the goals of improving the performance of the NAS while 

transitioning to NextGen. This will require us to address policies, procedures, operational 

approval processes, certification, regulatory guidance, training, criteria and standards—

along with technology. Most importantly, we must put ourselves in a position to clearly 

demonstrate improvements in capacity, efficiency and access in the next 3 to 5 years so 

the operator community will have the confidence and the commitment to make the 

business case for the technology investments needed for beyond 2015. We have a plan; 

now it is time to begin the really difficult work of execution, which is much more 

difficult than planning because it requires commitment to action. 

A similar task force or entity focusing on operational transition for the long-term communication 

systems, including the L-band, should address the same operational capabilities elements considered for 

the mid-term transition (Ref. 42): 

 Change in roles (e.g., pilot, controller) 

 Required technology and equipage 

 Available technology and equipage 

 Required decision support tools 

 Required policy change (DOT general, FAA general, FAA air traffic, FAA–AVS (advisory 

services), DoD) 

 Required new procedures 

 Implementation bandwidth 

 Required airspace changes 

 Required standards 

 Required operational approval 

 Required certification 

 Political risk 

 Links to planning documents 

 Required training 

 Other challenges 

 Environmental considerations 

Although a NextGen task force is not intended to produce technical guidance and requirements 

recommendations, its focus on government-to-industry consensus to resolve critical integration and 

implementation issues maximizes benefits of NextGen operational capabilities and aids in resolving 

business- and investment-related issues associated with implementing those capabilities. 

Technical details are still being developed and operational capabilities are not yet fully defined for the 

L-band system. A final selection of services chosen as applications for the new system will greatly 

influence transition time and process. When implemented, the system will provide a long-term capacity 

solution and will allow the introduction of new communications services. A gradual transition to the new 

band and services will lead to mixed equipage aircrafts cooperating for extensive period of time. 

A special consideration is given to the transition of UAS operations. As noted by the RTCA SC–203 

(Ref. 34), 

One aspect of the way ahead is to consider that not all UAS CC links need to operate in 

the same frequency bands or use the same technologies. All that is required is sufficient 

connectivity to allow individual UAs to operate in their desired airspace. Thus an 

evolutionary process is possible without mandating migration of existing UAS operations 

to the new bands and transmission systems as they become available. If an evolutionary 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 77 

process is chosen, some communications technologies could be made available for UAS 

operations quickly while others are being developed. It is important to note that with an 

evolutionary process, the short-term solutions will possibly have limited capacity so 

expansion of UAS operations beyond a limited capacity will require the introduction of 

the next solution. 

7.2.5 Relationship between the Proposed Systems 

Figure 35 illustrates how the proposed L-band system may relate to the VDL–2 and/or the 

AeroMACS systems. 

Figure 35.—Relationship between the L-band system and the VDL–2 and C-band systems. 

Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. 

 In Figure 35 

 An aircraft on the ground may receive some services over an AeroMACS system and other 

services over a VDL–2 and/or L-band 

 An aircraft in the air may be on VDL–2 only, both VDL–2 and L-band or L-band-only systems 

depending on services and transition stage 

 A/A communications is shown as being provided on L-band only 

 UAS- related services are assumed and shown as provided on L-band 

 L-band and C-band systems are “connected” through the ground network only. L-band systems 

will not access C-band sensors or otherwise communicate with the C-band fixed assets directly 

As it may take 10 years or more to equip all aircraft with the new FRS equipment, operation on 

different data links should be expected for many years and planed for accordingly. Transition issues will 

include but not limited to the controllers adjusting communications procedures from voice to a mixed 

voice/data to potentially data-only communications for some information transfers. With respect to voice 

vs. data communications, it should be noted, that voice communications are likely to remain as a backup 

in case of data communications failures and “voice-based procedures will remain as an alternative form of 

ANSP Info

Servers

C‐Band System

AeroMACS

Network

VDL‐2

System

L‐Band

System

Fixed

Assets/Sensors

Ground

Network

Plane on the

ground

Planesin the air

Unmanned

Aircraft
NASA/CR—2010-216326 78 

communications depending on the dynamics of the situation” (Ref. 5). Additionally, as noted earlier, the 

second stage of L-band implementation may include digital voice-based services. 

As noted above, the proposed L-band system presents a long-term solution for filling in the gaps in 

the NAS communications services and will be implemented to complete and tie together future NextGen 

capabilities. At this stage, the implementation/transition issues identified in this document can only 

present a preliminary discussion and should be revisited as the L-band development progresses and other 

systems and services (DataCom VDL–2, AeroMACS C-band network, etc.) are deployed prior to L-band 

system implementation. 

7.3 Summary of the Analyses 

7.3.1 Design Specifications Development Process 

Figure 36 presents a flow chart illustrating the system engineering process leading to the system 

requirements definition. Key system engineering processes are completed to serve as inputs to synthesis. 

Then, synthesis products are used to drive design specifications and lead to systems that satisfy the 

requirements. Each of the elements in the chart are not a one-step task but rather an iterative process 

undergoing multiple iterations before producing an output that could be used by a proceeding process. 

Additionally, as shown in Figure 36, processes are interrelated and loop back to verify and fine-tune the 

results. 

Figure 36.—Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) System Engineering Manual (SEM) 

requirements and architecture definition process (Ref. 8). 

Multiple system engineering processes providing the requirements and architecture for the proposed 

L-band system have been completed to date. 

Operating concepts and requirements for the FRS have been defined and reflected in the COCR 

Version 2.0 (Ref. 5). The FCI aeronautical data services definition task produced a list of services 

identified as potential applications for an L-band system. An L-band system can be viewed as part of the 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 79 

FRS providing a subset of services described in the COCR. As such, many of the requirements identified 

in the COCR would apply to the proposed L–DACS. 

The ConUse (Section 3.0), System Performance Requirements (Section 4.0), and Architecture 

(Section 5.0) describe L-band system concepts that result in functional system requirements and drive the 

proposed system architecture. 

Preliminary safety and security risk analyses (typically performed as part of the specialty engineering 

process shown in the Figure 36) define system design specifications required to provide a necessary level 

of safety and system security. 

Prototype design specifications for L–DACS1 and L–DACS2 were developed in Europe and are part 

of the iterative system development process. Interference scenarios have been defined to support future 

testing. Matching these specifications to system requirements and continuing the interference testing 

process will be part of requirements management and final technology selection. The final technology 

selection will be based on several technology assessment studies conducted to date. 

Monitoring stakeholder requirements is an ongoing effort to assure the proposed system meets the 

evolving customer needs. 

7.3.2 Spectrum Requirements and Channelization 

7.3.2.1 Spectrum Allocation 

AM(R)S spectrum21 is currently at or near saturation in high-traffic areas. Additional spectrum is 

required to support future navigation and surveillance systems and to allow for planned introduction of 

UAS into ATS airspace.WRC–07 agenda was called “to consider additional allocations for the 

aeronautical mobile (R) service in parts of the bands between 108 MHz and 6 GHz, in accordance with 

Resolution 414 (WRC-03)” (Ref. 43).

Although the initial focus is on bands currently available to aviation, potential bands were reviewed 

taking into account regulatory issues, as safety services require a higher degree of spectrum protection, an 

international scope of aviation for global allocations and interoperability, and technical requirements. 

As stated in the spectrum issues and the WRC–07 FAA presentation at the 2007 ICNS Conference 

(Ref. 44), results from the studies included the recommendation to utilize a portion of the 960- to 

1215-MHz band (portions of the L-band) for an LOS system with low-moderate data throughput. At the 

WRC–07, a coallocation for AM(R)S spectrum was approved in the 960- to 1164-MHz band. That is the 

band that L–DACS is designed by EUROCONTROL in which to operate. 

The attributes of L-band selected to provide en route communications include (Ref. 44) 

 Good propagation characteristics providing for an LOS transmission with moderate transmit 

power 

 Internationally standardized current use 

– 960- to 977-MHz used globally for national allotments 

– DME/TACAN in 978- to 1024-MHz limited to ground transmitters 

 Availability of a large portion of spectrum (up to 60 MHz is needed with a number of distinct 

channels based on prior studies) 

 Options for designed compatibility with incumbent users 

 WRC conference preparatory committee methods (CPMs): 960- to 1024- or 960- to 1164-MHz 

with no change to the current allocation always being a (usually unstated) CPM. The current U.S. 

WRC proposal supports 960- to 1024-MHz with regulatory protections for existing uses. It 

should be noted that there is a considerable difference in operational environment above 

1024 MHz (secondary surveillance radar (SSR), radio navigation satellite system (RNSS), etc.) 

 

21 Spectrum designated for providing safety and regularity of flight services via terrestrial (A/G, A/A) 

communications. Allocations designated as “(route)” or “(R)” for ATC and AOC.
NASA/CR—2010-216326 80 

Further analysis of industry papers and ITU-R-related activities should be conducted to assess the 

latest spectrum recommendations. This activity is recommended for Phase II. 

7.3.2.2 Interference Studies 

Several civil and military systems operate, or will operate, in parts of the 960- to 1215-MHz band, as 

shown in Figure 37. Detailed compatibility analyses are required between the proposed L-band system 

and the incumbents. 

Figure 37.—Systems operating in the 960- to 1215-MHz band (Ref. 45). Copyright Mileridge Ltd.; used with 

permission. Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. 

Several studies have been conducted in Europe to characterize L-band frequency environment and 

identify potential interference problems. 

The B–AMC22 Project Deliverable D1 (Ref. 45)—Spectrum Characterization—identifies and 

analyzes three spectrum sharing options offering the following conclusions: 

 Option 1: B–AMC utilizing spectrum between successive DME channels deploying the proposed 

system as an inlay in the L-band (960 to 1164 MHz). B–AMC frequency planning is required to 

implement the system utilizing channels between successive DME channels. 

 Option 2: assigning frequencies to B–AMC channels in areas where they are not used locally by 

DME. A combination of selecting B–AMC channels with a certain frequency offset from nearby 

DME systems, and ensuring that a minimum separation distance is maintained to allow avoiding 

causing interference to DME, SSR, and UAT. 

 Option 3: utilizing the lower part of the band (960 to 978 MHz) for B–AMC considering 

interference with the Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM), which is operated in the 

lower adjacent band. The report notes insufficient information available to determine whether it is 

technically feasible to implement this option. 

The subsequent systematic interference investigations report documents the impact of DME 

interference onto the performance of the B–AMC system to determine the level of tolerable interference 

power. It concludes that (Ref. 46) 

 

 

22 As noted in Figure 37, B–AMC and TIA–902 (P34) provide the basis for L–DACS1 technology.
NASA/CR—2010-216326 81 

When selecting appropriate centre frequencies for the B–AMC system, all interferers with the 

power level below –100 dBm can be neglected. Moreover, the interference situation in each channel 

can be simplified to one representative interferer with representative power and duty cycle, hence 

facilitating the ranking of different candidate centre frequencies with respect to interference 

condition. 

The conducted studies highlighted the need for interference testing. Proposed L-band interference 

scenarios (Ref. 47) were developed by DLR to define the procedures for generating interference scenarios 

that model interference from the incumbents to the proposed L-band system. Though interference depends 

on many factors including a particular frequency, the document defines general procedures that should 

apply to any L-band frequency range. 

As the DME systems present the main source of interference in the aeronautical L-band, strong 

emphasis is put on modeling interference with these systems. The document describes creating a DME 

interference simulator, discusses the methodology for generating interference scenarios taking into 

account DME ground stations, and investigates interference originating from aircraft interrogating these 

stations. Examples of interference scenarios for B–AMC reverse and/or forward links are given as 

appropriate. Interference from other L-band systems is addressed by modeling JTIDS, UAT, and SSR 

pulses. 

An additional study has been conducted by Roke Manor to investigate coexistence issues between 

DME and a B–AMC system providing a future A/G communication service in the L-band while assessing 

relevant system design issues. The DME and B–AMC coexistence study report draws the following 

conclusions and makes recommendations to EUROCONTROL (Ref. 48. Copyright Roke Manor 

Research; used with permission): 

 As it is not clear whether benefits of OFDM on the reverse link overweight the need for a highly 

linear airborne power amplifier, it is recommended to examine methods to reduce peak-to-mean 

ratio of OFDM in the reverse link (e.g., by using a single carrier FDMA or a similar technique). 

 Interference link budgets indicate that coexistence of B–AMC and DME systems is possible with 

a guard band of one DME channel between them. It is recommended to investigate whether key 

FCS system parameters could be selected in line with a commercial OFDM standard (e.g., 

WiMAX) to an extent that would facilitate partial reuse of COTS solutions. 

 Without a guard band, and disregarding the effects of terrain, existing DME stations in Europe 

could cause up to –75 dBm peak and –87 dBm mean interference into a B–AMC receiver at a 

9000-m altitude, assuming optimal frequency planning. It is recommended to assess whether it is 

possible to have the required guard band between DME and B–AMC through frequency 

coordination, taking into account the DME deployment in Europe and the effects of terrain. 

The draft B–AMC frequency plan is the latest in the series of deliverables that address interference 

and compatibility issues (Ref. 49). 

The draft frequency planning approach described in this report is restricted to the 

scenarios involving only B–AMC and DME systems. Moreover, as with current 

DME/TACAN planning, only ground-air scenarios with airborne victim DME and B–

AMC receivers have been investigated. As the En-Route coverage is the most demanding 

case with respect to the usage of spectral resources, this case has been investigated in 

detail—TMA and airport planning have been delegated to the future work.

The document specifies basic frequency planning rules according to B–AMC Deployment Option 2—

inlay deployment with a 0.5-MHz frequency offset between B–AMC and existing DME channels and 

presents an initial draft frequency plan for the deployment of B–AMC within Europe (Ref. 49. Copyright 

University of Salzburg; used with permission.) 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 82 

Within the initial planning exercise, large 120 nm En-Route B–AMC cells have been 

considered, with ground B–AMC TX power of +38 dBm. As expected, simultaneously 

considering the interference from the B–AMC GS [ground station] towards airborne 

DME receivers and the interference from DME GSs towards airborne B–AMC receivers 

have imposed strong restrictions upon the pool of available B–AMC frequencies. In the 

consequence, for some B–AMC cells an appropriate B–AMC inlay frequency could not 

be found (at least not without re-arranging DME allocations). In order to further increase 

the percentage of assignable B–AMC cells, the following supplementary conceptual 

refinements have been discussed: 

 Extension of the FL/RL B–AMC frequency range (985.5- to 1008.5-MHz to 979.5- 

to 1018.5-MHz) 

 Reduction of B–AMC cell radius for some B–AMC cells (from 120 nm to 60 nm), 

with the corresponding reduction of the B–AMC TX power (from 38 dBm to 

32 dBm) 

 Placement of B–AMC en route ground stations at sufficient distance from DME 

stations (fine adjustment of B–AMC ground station positions) 

 Investigation of an alternative B–AMC “overlay” concept with 0-MHz frequency 

offset to existing DME frequencies. 

The set of scenarios for several combinations of proposed improvements has been 

developed and investigated. The following general conclusions apply to that case: 

 The B–AMC en route system can be operated as a cellular system with different 

cell sizes, e.g., by using 120 nm B–AMC cells (T–cells) and 60 nm cells (S–cells). 

 For a large number of B–AMC cells in Europe, appropriate B–AMC candidate 

frequencies can be determined, which do not violate the stringent interference 

requirements (–106.6-dBm threshold with 12-dB margin) towards the DME 

system. 

 Taking into account the dense distribution of DME and TACAN stations in 

Europe, as an overall conclusion the obtained preliminary results are quite positive. 

However, detailed evaluation of the B–AMC interference situation is required, 

covering all interference scenarios mentioned in subchapter 3.1.3 [of Draft 

B–AMC Frequency Plan report] and considering appropriate reuse distances. 

Recommendations 

 Investigating other interference cases that could not be considered in this report 

(A/A and A/G) and their impact upon frequency planning should be included as a 

topic for future work. 

 Common agreement about the acceptable interference threshold for DME/B–AMC 

receivers should be achieved in the environment with multiple interferers. 

 The draft criteria for frequency planning used in this work should be refined, 

dependent on the outcome of the above activities.

All the studies described in this section were conducted for B–AMC/L–DACS1 systems. While 

general spectrum constraints will apply to any L-band system regardless of the technology, studies for 

L–DACS2 need to be conducted should this technology be considered for a proposed L-band system. 

Common assumptions, metrics, and interference criteria for both candidate technologies should be 

established and followed to enable an objective comparison between them. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 83 

7.3.3 Design Specifications and Prototype Development 

EUROCONTROL has funded these studies to provide the specifications for the L–DACS. The 

following reports were created for L–DACS1 and L–DACS2 candidate systems identified in ICAO and in 

the SESAR definition phase to support the FCI in the continental en route and TMA environments: 

 L–DACS1 System Definition Proposal: Deliverable D3–Design Specifications for L–DACS1 

Prototype, Edition 1.0, April 27 2009, Frequentis, DLR, University of Salzburg, and Selex 

(Ref. 50) 

 LDACS1 D2 Final Deliverable Edition: 1.0, Frequentis, DLR, University of Salzburg, and Selex, 

February 13, 2009 (Ref. 51) 

 L–DACS2 System Definition Proposal: Deliverable D1 Edition 0.34, EGIS AVIA, March 11, 

2009 (Ref. 52) 

 L–DACS2 Transmitter and Receiver Prototype Equipment Specifications: Deliverable D3 Edition 

1.2, EGIS AVIA, June 18, 2009 (Ref. 53) 

System specification studies capture the parameters relevant for the prototype development. The 

prototypes are (Ref. 50) 

aiming at demonstrating that the L–DACS system does not introduce unacceptable 

interference towards receiver of other L-band systems, as well that the L–DACS system 

itself satisfactory operates under presence of L-band interference coming from such 

external systems. 

Prototype development and subsequent system testing will facilitate final L-band system technology 

selection. Both, ground and airborne, as well as cosite23 scenarios will be investigated. Criteria and 

scenarios study key deliverable will include 

 Compatibility criteria 

 Testing plan 

 Interference scenarios 

 Interference scenarios and use of suppression bus for a co-site case 

Deliverables are to be finalized in September 2009 (Ref. 39). 

Continued research, development and testing activities closely coordinated between 

EUROCONTROL and FAA will allow realization of desired system capabilities while adhering to the 

strictest safety and security requirements. 

 

23 DME receiver and FRS transmitter on board an aircraft 

NASA/CR—2010-216326 85 

Appendix A.—Acronyms and Abbreviations 

The following list identifies acronyms and abbreviations used throughout this document. 

A/A air to air 

A/G air to ground 

ACARS Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System 

ACL air traffic control clearance 

ACSTS Aerospace Communications Systems Technical Support 

ADAS AWOS Data Acquisition Service 

ADDS Aviation Digital Data Service 

ADS automatic dependent surveillance 

ADS–B automatic dependent surveillance—broadcast 

ADS–C automatic dependent surveillance—contract 

ADS–R automatic dependent surveillance—rebroadcast 

AEEC Airlines Electronic Engineering Committee 

AeroMACS Aeronautical Mobile Airport Communications System 

AFB Air Force Base 

AFIS airport/aerodrome flight information service 

AGDLGMS Air Ground Data Link Ground Management System 

AIRSEP air-to-air self separation 

AMHS air traffic services message handling system 

AM(R)S aeronautical mobile (route) service 

AMS(R)S aeronautical mobile satellite (route) service 

AMACS all-purpose multichannel aviation communication system 

ANSP air navigation service provider 

AOA autonomous operations area 

AOC aeronautical (airline) operational control 

AP–17 Action Plan 17 

APT Airport 

ARINC Aeronautical Radio Incorporated 

ARNS Aeronautical Radio Navigation Services 

ARTCC air route traffic control center 

ASDE–X airport surface detection equipment, model X 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 86 

ATC air traffic control 

ATCRBS air traffic control radar beacon system 

ATCSCC air traffic control system command center 

ATCT air traffic control tower(s) 

ATFCM air traffic flow and capacity management 

ATIS Automatic Terminal Information Service 

ATM air traffic management 

ATO Air Traffic Organization 

ATS air traffic services 

ATSP air traffic service provider 

ATSU air traffic service unit 

AVS advisory services 

AWOS Automated Weather Observing System 

B–AMC Broadband Aeronautical Multicarrier Communication System 

BASOP base operations 

BLOS beyond line of sight 

BUEC backup emergency communications 

C&P crossing and passing 

CATM collaborative air traffic management 

CC control and communications 

CDA continuous descent arrivals or continuous descent approach 

CDM collaborative decision making 

CDTI cockpit display of traffic information 

CMU communications management unit 

CNS communication, navigation, surveillance 

COCR communications operating concepts and requirements 

ConOps concepts of operations 

ConUse concepts of use 

CPFSK continuous phase frequency shift keying 

CPM conference preparatory committee method 

CS control station 

CTA controlled times of arrival 

Data Comm Federal Aviation Administration Data Communications Program 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 87 

DC data communications 

DCL departure clearance 

DCNS data communications networks services 

DME distance measuring equipment 

DoD Department of Defense 

D–ATIS digital automatic terminal information service 

D–ORIS data link operational route information service 

D–OTIS data link operational terminal information service 

D–RVR data link runway visual range 

D–SIG data link surface information and guidance 

D–SIGMET Data Link Significant Meteorological Information 

DSC downstream clearance 

DSS decision support system 

D–TAXI data link taxi clearance 

DTS Dedicated Telecom Services 

DYNAV dynamic route availability 

EA enterprise architecture 

ECS emergency communications system 

EIS emergency information services 

ENR en route 

ERAM en route automation modernization 

ETVS enhanced terminal voice switch 

EUROCONTROL European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation 

FAA Federal Aviation Administration 

FANS Future Air Navigation System 

FCI future communications infrastructure 

FCS Future Communications Study 

FDD frequency-division duplex 

FDPS flight data processing system 

FFBD functional flow block diagram 

FIS flight information service 

FLIPCY flight plan consistency 

FMS flight management system 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 88 

FOC Flight Operations Center 

FPR final program requirements 

FRS future radio system 

FY fiscal year 

GA general aviation 

G/A ground-to-air 

G/G ground-to-ground 

GBAS ground-based augmentation system 

GBT ground-based transceiver 

GI general information 

GIS geographical information system 

GMSK Gaussian minimum shift keying 

GNI ground network interface 

GSM Global System for Mobile Communications 

HVAC heating, ventilation, and air conditioning 

ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization 

IDS information display system 

IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc 

IFR instrument flight rules 

ILS instrument landing system 

IM infrastructure management 

IOC initial operating capability 

IP internet protocol 

ISE information security engineering 

ITP in-trail procedures 

ITU International Telecommunication Union 

IWP integrated work plan 

JPDO Joint Planning and Development Office 

JTIDS Joint Tactical Information Distribution System 

L–DACS L-Band Digital Aeronautical Communications System 

LDL L-Band digital link 

LOS line of sight 

M&C monitoring and control 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 89 

M&S merging and spacing 

MAC Media Access Control 

MTBF mean time between failures 

NAS National Airspace System 

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

NASCR NAS common reference 

NAVAIDS navigation aids 

NEXRAD Next Generation Radar 

NEXCOM Next Generation Air/Ground Communications 

NextGen Next Generation Air Transportation System 

NNEW NextGen Network Enabled Weather 

NOCC National Operations Control Center 

NOTAM Notice to Airmen 

OFDM orthogonal frequency division multiplexing 

OI operational improvement 

OPA operational performance assessment 

ORP oceanic, remote, polar 

OSED operational services and environment description 

OV operational view 

PAIRAPP paired approaches 

PIREP pilot report 

PLA project-level agreement 

PPD pilot preferences downlink 

QoS quality of service 

RAPCO radar approach control 

RCAG remote communications air/ground facility 

RCE–C remote control equipment at control site 

RCE–R remote control equipment at remote (transmitter/receiver) site 

RCP required communication performance 

RCTP required communication technical performance 

RDVS rapid deployment voice switch 

RE&D research, engineering and development 

RF radiofrequency 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 90 

RFI radiofrequency interference 

RJ regional jet 

RMS remote-monitoring subsystem 

RNAV area navigation 

RNP required navigation performance 

RNSS Radio Navigation Satellite System 

RTCA RTCA, Inc. (founded as Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics) 

RTR remote transmitter/receiver 

RVR runway visual range 

S&A sense and avoid 

SAMS special use airspace management system 

SARPs standards and recommended practices 

SAP system access parameter 

SATCOM satellite communication 

SBAS satellite-based augmentation system 

SE system engineering 

SEM System Engineering Manual 

SESAR Single European Sky ATM Research 

SITA Société Internationale de Télécommunications Aéronautiques 

SOA service-oriented architecture 

SOC Service Operations Center 

SOCC Security Operations Control Center 

SPR safety and performance requirements 

SR system requirement 

SSE system safety engineering 

SSR secondary surveillance radar 

SUA special use airspace 

SV system view 

SWIM System Wide Information Management 

SYSCO system-supported coordination 

TACAN tactical air navigation 

TAP tailored arrival procedure 

TBA traffic information broadcast by aircraft 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 91 

TBO trajectory-based operations 

TCAS Traffic Collision Avoidance System 

TDD time-division duplex 

TDLS Terminal Data Link System 

TFM traffic flow management 

TFR temporary flight restrictions 

TIA Telecommunications Industry Association 

TIS–B traffic information services, broadcast 

TM traffic management 

TMA terminal maneuvering area 

TRACON Terminal Radar Approach Control Facility 

TRL technical readiness level 

TSOs technical standard orders 

TVS terminal voice switch 

UA unmanned aircraft 

UAS unmanned aircraft system 

UAT universal access transceiver 

UHF ultra high frequency 

URCO urgent contact 

VDL very high frequency digital link 

VHF very high frequency 

VoIP digital voice over internet protocol 

VOR very high frequency omnidirectional radio range 

WAKE wake vortex 

WARP Weather and Radar Processor 

WINS Weather Information Network Server 

WRC World Radio Communications Conference 

Wx Weather 

4–D four-dimensional 

4DT four-dimensional trajectory 

NASA/CR—2010-216326 93 

Appendix B.—National Airspace System Concept of Operations 

Applicable to the Proposed L–DACS 

L–DACS could provide a communication link to transfer surveillance and weather information, 

facilitate flight and resource management, and enable exchange of aeronautical information in the future 

NAS. Table 19 through Table 23 document the select RTCA National Airspace System (NAS) Concepts 

of Operation (ConOps) found applicable to the proposed L–DACS. 

In addition to the relevant section number, the “Relevant text” column presents the specific text from 

the NAS ConOps document (Ref. 1) pertaining to the identified type of information being exchanged 

and/or service provided. 

Section 4 of Reference 1 is devoted to surface operations. While the proposed L-band system would 

mostly facilitate communication with an aircraft in the air (wheels off the ground), the select surface 

communications operational concepts presented here were found relevant. It is assumed that the L–DACS 

could enable transfer of data and information from ground locations to an aircraft prior to landing to 

facilitate movement on the surface. 

TABLE 19.—THE ROLE OF SURVEILLANCE INFORMATION: RTCA NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM (NAS) 

CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS (ConOps) APPLICABLE TO THE PROPOSED L–DACS

[Acronyms are defined in Appendix A.] 

ID NAS ConOps 

section 

Relevant text 

S-1 1.5.2 Traffic information collected by surveillance systems is transmitted to properly equipped 

aircraft. Thus equipped users have position information of appropriate aircraft available to 

support flight deck decisions. 

S-2 1.5.3 

2nd bullet 

Enhanced CNS systems and automation in aircraft complement automation aids on the ground 

permitting more autonomous operations. This improved autonomy combined with greater ability 

to share information permits workload to be distributed between service provider and operator in 

a balance appropriate for the operations being conducted. 

S-3 4.1.31 Accurate airport environmental information, including traffic, permits appropriately equipped 

aircraft to navigate on the airport surface with almost no forward visibilitya

. 

S-4 4.2.21 The proliferation of CDTI avionics and supporting ground infrastructure takes place in this time 

frame. The ground system that receives aircraft position reports also broadcasts traffic 

information and a complete set of graphical and text weather products. Safety is enhanced 

by situation displays that depict airborne and surface traffic as well as aerodrome information. 

S-5 4.3.21 

1st paragraph 

 In addition, ground-based surveillance data is shared with users as a safety enhancement for 

preventing incursions. 

S-6 5.1.1 

3rd paragraph 

Pilot situational awareness increases through the introduction of CDTI, as well as better weather 

and navigation information, increases safety and efficiency of approaches and departures and 

leads to better runway utilization. 

S-7 5.1.3 

2nd paragraph 

Virtually all aircraft are equipped to provide position and intent information, and to receive 

position and intent data from other aircraft.

S-8 6.1.2 En route surveillance is accomplished through a combination of primary radar, beacon 

interrogation, and broadcasts of aircraft position and speed. As more sources of position data 

become available, more traffic is under some form of improved surveillance. An increasing 

number of aircraft are equipped with satellite based navigation, digital communications, and the 

capability to automatically transmit position data. 

 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 94 

TABLE 20.—THE ROLE OF SURVEILLANCE INFORMATION: RTCA NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM (NAS) 

CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS (ConOps) APPLICABLE TO THE PROPOSED L–DACS 

[Acronyms are defined in Appendix A.] 

ID NAS ConOps 

section 

Relevant text 

W-1 1.4 

2nd bullet 

In addition to this pool of common information, SWIM provides context-sensitive information to 

NAS elements that require the information. (This includes flight deck access to the information, 

such as weather and resource status.) 

W-2 1.5.2 

9 bullet 

A SWIM system is developed by the service provider to distribute timely and consistent 

information across the NAS for both user and service provider planning ... The system serves as 

an avenue for greater exchange of electronic data and information between users and service 

providers including... Dynamic information including but not limited to current and forecast 

weather, radar summaries, hazardous condition warnings, information on updated airport and 

airspace capacity constraints temporary flight restrictions (TFR), and special use airspace (SUA). 

W-3 1.5.3 

6th bullet 

There are continued advancements in the scope and accuracy of the weather information available 

to the service provider and use throughout the NAS, including automatic simultaneous broadcast 

of hazardous weather alerts for wind shear, turbulence, microburst, gust fronts; and areas 

of precipitation, lightning, icing, and low cloud ceilings and visibility. SWIM provides access 

to this information to all service providers and to participating aircraft via data link. Improved 

weather information integrated into DSSs and disseminated via data link reduces encounters 

with hazardous weather. 

W-4 2.1.1 TFM service providers monitor traffic, weather, and infrastructure ...Improved information 

exchange among users and service providers enables shared insight about weather, demand, and 

capacity constraints which enhances the users understanding of NAS status and TFM initiatives. 

W-5 2.1.3 

4th paragraph 

The National Weather Service tracks and projects weather systems using constantly updated data. 

Using this data fused with the automatically received data from airborne platforms, flow 

managers have accurate information to use in developing TFM initiatives.

W-6 2.2.1 

1st paragraph

Users have access to an increasing amount of NAS information including airport status and 

acceptance rate, composite weather information developed collaboratively by the FAA and users 

to assure a common projection of future weather. 

W-7 3.1.2 

1st paragraph

A common geographical information system (GIS) format is used to store all NAS information 

including terrain, obstacle, weather, and navigation, surveillance and communication coverage 

information. This information is available via SWIM to all service providers and users. 

W-8 3.2.1 

4th paragraph

Data-link-equipped users load the flight plan directly into the flight management system 

(FMS). The user obtains a complete weather briefing for the proposed route via the FOC 

computer. In addition, system-wide information is obtained via the FOC SWIM interface. 

W-9 3.2.3 

3rd paragraph

Greater use of electronic flight planning, navigation database updates and weather briefing 

services via SWIM results in the routine transfer of preflight planning data to the flight deck. 

Dynamic safety-critical (e.g., turbulence, icing) and other flight plan is data linked directly 

to aircraft for use during flight.

W-10 3.3.2 

3rd paragraph

There is a wider use of information automatically down-linked from the flight deck. The 

information (incorporated into SWIM) includes current flight conditions and aircraft 

performance characteristics. Information uses include better weather prediction, creation of 

normalized turbulence maps, and improved safety analysis. 

W-11 4.1.11 

2nd paragraph 

The introduction of data-linked meteorological information improves overall situational 

awareness. Properly equipped aircraft receive graphical weather information via data link, 

including current observations, pilot reports, hazardous phenomena in both graphic and 

text format, and winds aloft information.

W-12 4.1.21 

3rd paragraph

Clearances, airport information, and weather conditions (e.g., current, forecast, hazardous) 

are provided over data link to more users at more airports. 

W-13 4.1.21 

4th paragraph

The system provides access to airport environmental information, arrival, departure, and taxi 

schedules, airborne and surface surveillance information, flight information, ATIS and other 

weather information, and TFM initiatives. 

W-14 4.1.31 

1st paragraph

Hazardous weather alerts are automatically and simultaneously broadcast to aircraft via 

data link and service providers via SWIM. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 95 

TABLE 20.—THE ROLE OF SURVEILLANCE INFORMATION: RTCA NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM (NAS) 

CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS (ConOps) APPLICABLE TO THE PROPOSED L–DACS 

[Acronyms are defined in Appendix A.] 

ID NAS ConOps 

section 

Relevant text 

W-15 4.2.11 

1st paragraph

Many users continue to use Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System 

(ACARS) as a source of data linked information. ATIS and other weather information are 

received via data link or by voice. 

W-16 4.2.21 

3rd paragraph 

The ground system that receives aircraft position reports also broadcasts traffic 

information and a complete suite of graphical and text products, including 

precipitation/lightning, icing, low ceiling/visibility maps, surface hazards, and wind shear 

and turbulence information, as well as site-specific weather reports and forecasts. Safety is 

enhanced through the use of situation displays that depict airborne and surface traffic as well as 

aerodrome information. 

W-17 4.3.11 

1st paragraph

SWIM and ACARS enhance the service provider’s ability to provide data products such as 

NOTAMs and meteorological information to the airport vicinity. Although weather information 

and advisories continue to be available via traditional means, there is increased use of automation 

to collect and package the information and increased use of data link to disseminate routine 

and hazardous weather and traffic information. 

W-18 4.3.21 

1st paragraph 

SWIM provides access to weather and information via data link to flight crews, allowing 

them to develop near-real-time picture of the surrounding environment. SWIM and data link also 

expedite the service provider’s task of providing data products such as NOTAMs and 

meteorological information for the airport vicinity when changed or needed y the user. 

W-19 5 

5th and 6th 

bullets 

Automatic exchange of information between aircraft and ground-based DSSs improves the 

accuracy and coordination of arrival profiles. Aircraft wind and weather information is shared 

with the service provider and users. 

W-20 5 

7th bullet 

Accurate weather information is available to service providers. In addition, automatic broadcast 

of hazardous weather alerts for wind shear, microburst, gust fronts are delivered simultaneously 

and presented graphically to the user and service provider. 

W-21 5.1.1 

3rd paragraph 

This [increased pilot situation awareness through CDTI] coupled with better weather and 

navigation information, increases the safety and efficiency of approaches and departures, 

resulting in better runway utilization. 

W-22 5.1.2 

2nd paragraph 

Data link and flight deck displays enable pilots to monitor current meteorological data, 

automated hazardous weather alerts, and surrounding traffic, thus reducing the number of 

verbal miscommunications of this routine information. 

W-23 5.1.2 

5th paragraph 

Improved weather data and displays, including increasingly accurate information on weather 

severity and location, minimize disruption in departure and arrival traffic. 

W-24 5.2.2 

1st paragraph 

Real time weather information and maps are available via SWIM on the flight deck. 

W-25 5.2.3 

4th paragraph

When operationally advantageous and mutually agreed upon, flight deck separation is authorized 

by ATC. Most [DoD] aircraft are equipped with satellite-based navigation aids and many have 

data link capability and on-board collision avoidance avionics. 

W-26 5.3.2 

4th paragraph 

The service provider has improved capabilities to assist pilots in avoiding hazardous weather. 

Enhanced weather data and weather alerts are depicted on service provider displays, and are 

immediately available, via SWIM, to the user. These displays improve the service provider’s 

ability to coordinate with pilots and with other service providers to ensure the avoidance of 

hazardous weather. 

W-27 6.1.2 

4th paragraph

These services include certain ATC clearances, current and forecast weather, NOTAMs and 

hazardous weather warnings, updated charts, current weather, SUA status, and other required data 

that are up-linked (or data-loaded) to the aircraft to facilitate better planning. 

W-28 6.3.1 

3rd paragraph

There is improved weather information available to service provider pilots. This information, 

available from common weather sources, increases the service provider’s effectiveness in 

controlling aircraft in airspace that contains hazardous weather and in providing weather 

advisories to pilots. 

 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 96 

TABLE 21.—IDENTIFICATION OF THE ROLE OF FLIGHT MANAGEMENT INFORMATION—RTCA NATIONAL 

AIRPSACE SYSTEM (NAS) CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS (ConOps) 

[Acronyms are defined in Appendix A.] 

ID NAS ConOps 

section 

Relevant text 

FM-1 1.5.1 

8th bullet 

The high-altitude airspace permits aircraft operations along user-preferred profiles from entry 

through cruise to final exit. Entry to and exit from the airspace are based on preferred profiles 

for climb and descent. Within that airspace, aircraft operate closer to their optimum altitudes by 

increasing the available flight levels using 1000-ft rather than 2000-ft separation. 

FM-2 1.5.2 

8th bullet

Terminal-area procedures are expanded to provide increased efficiency, flexibility, 

predictability, and airspace accessibility. When the projected demand for volumes of airspace is 

at or near capacity and after collaboration between users and TFM, there are temporary route 

structures with transition points for moving to and from user trajectories 

FM-3 1.5.2 

9th bullet 

A SWIM system is developed to distribute timely and consistent information....[Including]: 

- Flight information on each flight, including the filed flight profile and all amendments, 

first movement of the aircraft, wheels-up, position data in flight, touchdown time, gate or 

parking assignment, and engine shutdown.

FM-4 1.5.2 

13th bullet

The flight planning system accommodates all uses of the airspace as the flight profile evolves to 

include real time SUA operations scheduling information. 

FM-5 1.5.2 

14th bullet

By integrating all airspace management systems, the NAS achieves the technical goal of 

providing in a timely manner the airspace necessary to execute the flight profile. The ATM 

system manages airspace based on each user's needs, including proximity to the user’s base of 

operations. As a result, more airspace, including special use, is made available to more users 

with increased efficiency. 

FM-6 2.1.2. 

1st paragraph 

Collaboration via DSSs and intelligent agents supports negotiation of revised flight trajectories 

in real time. 

FM-7 2.1.3 Flow-constrained areas are managed by allocating access, collaborative rerouting, and realigning 

sectors and associated resources. 

FM-8 2.2.1 

1st paragraph 

Users have access to an increasing amount of NAS information, including airport status and 

acceptance rate and composite weather information developed collaboratively by the FAA and 

users to ensure a common projection of future weather. Improved individual support capabilities 

use investigative operations and develop individual strategies to mitigate demand-capacity 

imbalances and their effect on the individual user fleets. Sharing strategies with the ATCSCC 

allows service providers to evaluate conditions based on user intention rather than published 

schedules. 

FM-9 2.2.1 

2nd paragraph 

Working with the service providers, users better manage en route congestion by collaboratively 

evaluating the situation, developing re-routes around the area, and providing a more refined 

allocation of flights to the reroutes. 

FM-10 2.2.2 

1st paragraph 

With the increasing ability to maintain common situation awareness, users plan flight profiles 

that consider known constraints and provide the best advantage to their operations. 

FM-11 2.2.2 

2nd paragraph 

... In addition, the flight planning system expands to offer users the opportunity to provide 

alternative profiles for flights. These alternative profiles are tested on a continuing basis as trial 

plans that are selected if conditions do not develop as foreseen. The users and service 

providers collaborate by modifying/exchanging these alternatives throughout the course of 

the flight. 

FM-12 2.2.3 

1st paragraph 

...Within that constraint and allocation, the NAS has the ability to conduct a system-supported 

coordination (SYSCO)8 auto-negotiation of the flight profile to best meet the user's need within 

that user’s NAS resource allocation. The systems interactively re-plan each flight against both 

current constraints and any ancillary problems that arise through the execution of the initiative. 

For airborne flights, new profiles that do not require a tactical change to trajectory are 

provided to the flight deck for approval and execution and are included into the NAS as 

profile updates. 

For flights that have nearer-term tactical changes, the new profile is provided to the flight 

deck and service provider as trial plans and are implemented when appropriate. 

FM-13 3 

1st bullet 

Elements of SWIM are used to obtain and distribute flight-specific data and aeronautical 

information, including international coordination of planned flight trajectory.
NASA/CR—2010-216326 97 

TABLE 21.—IDENTIFICATION OF THE ROLE OF FLIGHT MANAGEMENT INFORMATION—RTCA NATIONAL 

AIRPSACE SYSTEM (NAS) CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS (ConOps) 

[Acronyms are defined in Appendix A.] 

ID NAS ConOps 

section 

Relevant text 

FM-14 3 

6th bullet 

Real-time trajectory updates reflect more realistic departure times, resulting in more accurate 

traffic load predictions, and increased flexibility due to the imposition of fewer restrictions. 

FM-15 3 

2nd bullet 

As the information available through SWIM increases, a more collaborative role for users 

evolves based on the access to accurate real-time NAS information for improved flight planning. 

Examples of this information include current and 

predicted SUA status, infrastructure status, traffic density, and prevailing TFM initiatives. 

FM-17 3 

3rd bullet 

Decision support suites are available for both interactive preflight planning with the service 

provider as well as changes by the pilot and/or dispatcher during the course of the flight. 

FM-17 3.1.1 

3rd paragraph 

There is real-time sharing of system demand and the virtual ATM information, enabling service 

providers to collaboratively interact with the user and to mutually develop solutions to 

problems. 

FM-18 3.1.2 

2nd paragraph 

Flight plan information is incorporated into the flight profile. This profile can be as simple as the 

user’s preferred path or as detailed as a time-based trajectory that includes the user’s preferred 

path and preferred climb and descent profiles. The climb and descent profiles may include 

extended periods of continuous change. This is similar in nature to a discretionary clearance 

(climb or descent) but is part of the flight planning process and, ultimately, the approved flight 

profile. This negotiated profile is available both to the user and to service providers across the 

NAS. 

FM-19 3.1.2 

3rd paragraph 

To generate the flight profile, users access current and predicted weather, traffic density, 

restrictions, and SUA status information. When the profile is filed, it is automatically checked 

against various conditions and constraints. Potential problems are displayed automatically to the 

user for reconciliation. Upon filing, the flight profile created at the initiation of planning is 

updated, as are all affected projections of NAS demand 

FM-20 3.1.2 

4th paragraph 

At the completion of the planning process, the user supplies the service provider with both the 

flight profile that best balances the NAS constraints and the user’s preferred flight profile. This 

information, including any subsequent changes, is available electronically to all service 

providers until the termination of the flight. 

FM-21 3.1.3 

1st and 2nd 

paragraph 

Interactive flight planning capabilities with immediate access to real-time data are fully 

implemented and are available throughout the flight to the flight deck, FOC, and service 

provider. User-preferred routing is available to all properly equipped aircraft for both domestic 

and international flights. Controlled times of arrival (CTA) are the primary method for 

regulating flows in the planning, tactical, and strategic timeframes. 

The flight profile evolves with changes to operations to allow greater flexibility in user 

preferences, including the planning and filing of parabolic flight profiles. 

FM-22 3.2.1 

2nd paragraph 

The TFM information network enables a two-way exchange of real-time information. Using 

flight plan information, flow managers determine when either airport or airspace demand is 

predicted to exceed capacity, thereby warranting some type of flow management initiative. NAS 

users receive information about projected areas of concern and revise their plans on a real-time 

basis. 

FM-23 3.2.1 

4th paragraph 

Data link-equipped users load the flight plan directly into the aircraft Flight Management 

System (FMS). The user obtains a complete weather briefing for the proposed route via the 

FOC computer. In addition, system-wide information is obtained through the FOC SWIM 

interface. 

FM-24 3.2.2 

1st paragraph 

SWIM ensures a continuously updated information base of NAS items, including service 

constraints and infrastructure status. The flight planner uses this data to prepare a flight profile 

by performing a probe for the user-preferred route against the known system constraints. User 

DSSs using information available via SWIM analyze the route that most closely balances user 

preferences and constraints. The use of CTAs continues to expand across NAS resources. As 

conditions change during the planning phase or during the flight, the user is notified, and 

he/she is able to interactively determine the impact of the changes on the flight and modify 

the flight profile as desired. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 98 

TABLE 21.—IDENTIFICATION OF THE ROLE OF FLIGHT MANAGEMENT INFORMATION—RTCA NATIONAL 

AIRPSACE SYSTEM (NAS) CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS (ConOps) 

[Acronyms are defined in Appendix A.] 

ID NAS ConOps 

section 

Relevant text 

FM-25 3.2.2 

2nd paragraph 

The status of active and proposed flights, as well as real-time updates to reflect more realistic 

departure times (e.g., the latest planned departure times) are available to users. SWIM and 

SYSCO facilitate more effective collaborative decision making (CDM) between the FOC and 

service provider. 

FM-26 3.2.2 

paragraph 3 

Most aircraft are equipped with advanced navigation and some form of data link 

communications. Properly equipped aircraft can also access the NAS status information, and 

pilots can participate in the collaboration to develop new flight profiles while airborne. 

These proposed flight profile changes are coordinated electronically with the service provider. 

FM-27 3.2.2 

4th paragraph 

Users without an FOC capability access the same flight data used by all other system users and 

service providers via appropriate devices. They are able to enter a command and be transferred 

to a service provider for clarification of the information. Depending on the user’s equipment, 

this dialog is by voice or through electronic messaging. For users equipped with data link, the 

capability exists to load a flight profile directly into the aircraft FMS. Other users can store 

the flight profile information on disk and upload it into the aircraft’s avionics for use. 

FM-28 3.2.2 

8th paragraph

Shared access to all commercial space operations schedules is provided via SWIM 

FM-29 3.2.2 

9th paragraph 

SWIM enables domestic and international users and service providers to access flight profiles 

and associated SUA data. 

FM-30 3.2.3 

1st paragraph 

SWIM and Omni-SYSCO support an interactive flight planning capability for all properly 

equipped users to aid in filing user-preferred departure-to-destination flight profiles. 

FM-31 3.3.2 

1st and 2nd 

paragraphs 

SWIM information improves the user’s ability to create a flight profile, which facilitates the 

automatic generation of a flight profile containing either the user’s preferred flight path or a 

more detailed time-based trajectory within the known ATM system constraints. Potential 

problems are automatically displayed to the planner for reconciliation. Upon filing, the flight 

profile is updated, as necessary, along with all affected projections of NAS demand. 

As conditions change, SWIM (in concert with SYSCO) allows the planner to access information 

used to determine the impact of the changes on the flight. Intelligent agents are introduced in 

this period to identify the best alternatives in light of ATM system changes and user preferences. 

SWIM information is available to all users and service providers until the termination of the 

flight. Information such as runway preferences and aircraft weight or information to support 

flight following can be added during the planning phase or during flight. 

FM-32 4.1.2 1 

3rd paragraph 

Clearances, airport information, and weather conditions (e.g., current, forecast, 

hazardous) are provided over data link to more users at more airports. Taxi routes and 

positions of other aircraft are data linked and displayed in appropriately equipped aircraft. The 

receipt of taxi routes over data link relieves communication frequency congestion. Pilot 

situational awareness and safety are enhanced with an integrated display of the aircraft’s 

position, taxi route, and hazards. 

FM-33 4.1.2 1 

4th paragraph 

Access to real-time data for surface movement DSSs makes for an increasingly integrated 

NAS. The system provides access to airport environmental information; arrival, departure, and 

taxi schedules; airborne and surface surveillance information; flight information; ATIS and other 

weather information; and TFM initiatives. 

FM-34 4.1.21 

 5th paragraph 

On taxi out, the flight’s time-based trajectory is updated in SWIM, and projections are made 

based on prevailing traffic conditions. At wheels-up, this trajectory is again updated. This 

continuous updating of the flight profile improves real-time planning for both the user and the 

service provider. 

FM-35 4.3.1 1 

4th paragraph 

The service provider’s ability to plan surface movement improves as timely traffic information 

becomes available. Both the initial values and subsequent adjustments are incorporated into the 

surface management information system to ensure consistency and an integrated approach 

across systems 

FM-36 5 

9th bullet 

Shared access to SWIM supports an automated exchange of gate and runway preference data to 

stakeholders. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 99 

TABLE 21.—IDENTIFICATION OF THE ROLE OF FLIGHT MANAGEMENT INFORMATION—RTCA NATIONAL 

AIRPSACE SYSTEM (NAS) CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS (ConOps) 

[Acronyms are defined in Appendix A.] 

ID NAS ConOps 

section 

Relevant text 

FM-37 5.3.2 

6th paragraph 

The user’s runway assignment preference is available within SWIM, and is used in conjunction 

with departure and arrival DSSs and integrated surface management capabilities to coordinate an 

optimal assignment and sequence. 

FM-38 5.3.2 6th 

paragraph 

Data from SWIM allows service providers to monitor traffic demand, NAS infrastructure status, 

and other conditions in order to allocate resources, including changes in staffing. Service 

providers also update the NAS about the available capacity of airport and surrounding airspace 

resources and the current status of SUA. This facilitates more effective collaboration with FOCs 

and improved formulation of TFM agreements. 

FM-39 6.1.2 

3rd paragraph 

Flights routinely operate on user-preferred trajectories with fewer aircraft constrained to a fixed 

route structure. The requirement to operate on structured routes only exists in high density areas 

to avoid terrain and active SUA and to facilitate the transition between areas with differing 

separation standards. Demand and capacity imbalances are resolved, in collaboration with the 

users, via voluntary changes in trajectories or through the establishment of temporary routes and 

transition points. User-preferred trajectories are accommodated earlier in the flight and continue 

closer to the destination. 

FM-40 6.1.2 

5th paragraph 

The status of active and proposed flights and NAS infrastructure is available to NAS users and 

service providers. This allows users to collaborate with ATM in deciding TFM initiatives 

FM-41 6.2.1 

1st paragraph 

The FOC monitors the status of the NAS and relays status information to pilots. FOC and 

aircraft provide preference information, which the service provider considers when making 

in-flight route changes. 

FM-42 6.2.2 

1st paragraph 

There is increased collaboration between the FOC and ATM as the FOC interactively probes 

proposed route changes. Modified routes are developed collaboratively between the FOC and 

the service provider and then data linked to the aircraft and downstream ATC facilities. In 

addition, working with TFM specialists, the FOC helps to define and implement TFM initiatives 

to relieve airspace congestion. 

TABLE 22.—IDENTIFICATION OF THE ROLE OF AERONAUTICAL INFORMATION—RTCA NATIONAL AIRPSACE 

(NAS) CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS (ConOps) 

ID NAS ConOps 

section 

Relevant text 

A-1 1.5.1 

1st bullet 

Collaboration supports determining when, where, and how transitional route structures are 

established in the airspace to meet a short-term problem. 

A-2 1.5.2 

7th bullet 

While Required Navigation Performance (RNP)/RNAV capabilities increase, the low-altitude 

airspace structure remains largely unchanged. Widespread area navigation equipage and expanded 

surveillance coverage with new technology provide increased access to airports and airspace in all 

weather conditions. 

A-3 1.5.2 

8th bullet 

There are temporary route structures with transition points for moving to and from user trajectories 

A-4 1.5.2 

9th bullet 

A SWIM system is developed by the service provider to distribute timely and consistent 

information across the NAS including 

Static data, such as electronic navigation data, maps, charts, airport facility guides, and published 

Notices to airmen (NOTAMs) is available directly from the Internet as well as various intranets... 

Dynamic information, including, but not limited to, current and forecast weather, 

radar summaries, hazardous condition warnings, information on updated airport 

and airspace capacity constraints, temporary flight restrictions (TFR), and 

Special use airspace (SUA) schedules. 

Flight information 

Schedule information 

A-5 1.5.2 

12th bullet 

Traffic information collected by surveillance systems is transmitted to properly equipped 

aircraft to support flight deck decisions. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 100 

TABLE 22.—IDENTIFICATION OF THE ROLE OF AERONAUTICAL INFORMATION—RTCA NATIONAL AIRPSACE 

(NAS) CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS (ConOps) 

ID NAS ConOps 

section 

Relevant text 

A-6 1.5.2 

14th bullet 

The ATM system manages airspace based on each user's needs, including proximity to the user’s 

base of operations. 

A-7 1.5.2 

17th bullet 

Tools and procedures are in place for frequent evaluation (up to several times a day) of the airspace 

structure and anticipated traffic flows, with adjustments made accordingly. 

A-8 1.5.3 

2nd bullet 

Enhanced CNS systems and automation in aircraft complement automation aids on the ground, 

permitting more autonomous operations. This improved autonomy, combined with greater ability to 

share information, permits the workload to be distributed between the service provider and user in a 

balance appropriate for the operations being conducted. 

A-9 1.5.3 

4th bullet 

Seamless communications and coordination, coupled with information accessible through SWIM, 

allow real-time reassignment of airspace between facilities to meet contingencies such as equipment 

outages. 

A-10 2.1.3 

2nd paragraph 

Flow-constrained areas are managed by allocating access, collaborative rerouting, and realigning 

sectors and associated resources. 

A-11 2.2.1 

1st paragraph 

Users have access to an increasing amount of NAS information including airport status and 

acceptance rate, ... 

A-12 2.2.1 

3rd paragraph 

Working with the service providers, users better manage en route congestion by collaboratively 

evaluating the situations, developing re-routes around the flow constrained areas, and providing a 

more refined allocation of flights to the reroutes. 

A-13 2.3.2 3rd 

paragraph 

Information about arrival capacity allocations, reroute programs and other restrictions is 

automatically recorded, as is information from local facilities.... 

A-14 3 

1st bullet 

Elements of SWM are used to obtain and distribute flight-specific data and aeronautical 

information, including international coordination of flight trajectory. 

A-15 3.1.1 

3rd paragraph 

There is real time sharing of system demand and the virtual ATM information... User flight 

planning systems account for system constraints such as flow restrictions, hazardous weather, SUA 

and infrastructure outages. 

A-16 3.1.2 

1st paragraph 

A National Airspace System common reference (NASCR) and index that incorporates a common 

Geographical Information System (GIS) format is used to store all NAS information including 

terrain, obstacle, weather, and navigation, surveillance and communication coverage information. 

This information is available via SWIM to all service providers and users. 

A-17 3.1.2 

3rd paragraph 

To generate the flight profile, users access current and predicted weather, traffic density, 

restrictions, and SUA status information. 

A-18 3.2.2 7th 

paragraph 

DoD and FAA service providers maintain and have access to a continuously updated database of 

airspace and flow restrictions. Using this data, the DoD flight planner prepares a proposed flight 

profile, performing a probe for active or scheduled SUAs, weather, and airspace and flow 

restrictions. 

A-19 3.2.2 

9th paragraph 

Space vehicle flight profiles describe user needs and take into account flow conditions and 

constraints. SWIM enables domestic and international users and service providers to access flight 

profiles and associated SUA data. 

A-20 41 

6th bullet 

Airport layouts on moving maps and corresponding standardized airport signage provide flight 

crews with increased situation awareness and reduce runway incursions. 

A-21 4.1.21 

1st paragraph 

Moving map displays enhance pilot familiarity with the airport, leading to better planning and 

increased safety. 

A-22 4.1.21 

4th paragraph 

Access to real-time data for surface movement DSSs makes for an increasingly integrated NAS. 

The surface management information system facilitates coordination between decision makers at all 

levels of the airport operation—service provider, flight crews, FOC, ramp, airport operator, and 

airport emergency centers. The system provides access to airport environmental information; 

arrival, departure, and taxi schedules; airborne and surface surveillance information; flight 

information; ATIS and other weather information; and TFM initiatives. This data sharing allows 

service providers to coordinate local operations with airline ramp and airport operators, thus 

improving overall airport operations. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 101 

TABLE 22.—IDENTIFICATION OF THE ROLE OF AERONAUTICAL INFORMATION—RTCA NATIONAL AIRPSACE 

(NAS) CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS (ConOps) 

ID NAS ConOps 

section 

Relevant text 

A-23 4.1.31 

1st paragraph 

Using data link, pilots receive ATIS-type messages with Runway Visual Range (RVR), 

braking action and surface condition reports, current precipitation, runway availability, and 

wake turbulence and wind shear advisories. Hazardous weather alerts are automatically and 

simultaneously broadcast to aircraft via data link and service providers via SWIM. 

A-24 4.2.11 

2nd paragraph 

Airport maps are electronically available to properly equipped users 

A-25 4.2.2 1 

3rd paragraph 

The proliferation of CDTI avionics and supporting ground infrastructure takes place in this time 

frame. The ground system that receives aircraft position reports also broadcasts radar-derived 

traffic information and a complete set of graphical and text products ... Safety is enhanced by 

situation displays that depict airborne and surface traffic as well aerodrome information. 

A-26 4.3.1 1 

1st paragraph 

SWIM and ACARS enhance the service provider’s ability to provide data products such as 

NOTAMs and meteorological information for the airport vicinity. Although weather information 

and advisories continue to be available via traditional means, there is increased use of automation to 

collect and package the information and increased use of data link to disseminate routine and 

hazardous weather and traffic information.

A-27 5 

10th bullet 

Status information concerning the NAS infrastructure components that support arrival/departure 

operations is shared with all stakeholders. 

A-28 5.1.1 

3rd paragraph 

Arriving aircraft receive expanded airport information through data link for display on the 

flight deck. The information includes RVR, braking action and surface condition reports, and 

runway availability as well as wake turbulence and wind shear advisories 

A-29 5.1.2 

2nd paragraph 

All communication frequencies needed for operation in the airport vicinity are available for display 

to the flight deck, with any changes from the published list uplinked over data link. Data link and 

flight deck displays enable pilots to monitor current meteorological data, automated 

hazardous weather alerts, and surrounding traffic, thus reducing the number of verbal 

miscommunications of this routine information. Pilots conduct approaches using independent 

navigation systems and begin monitoring the approach path on a moving map display. 

A-30 5.1.3 

1st paragraph 

Seamless data link is available for most pilot and service provider communications. Some 

emergency communications are automatically sent to both pilot and the service provider to 

further increase safety by eliminating the time necessary for a human to relay the message. 

Examples of such messages are wind shear alerts (generated either by airborne or ground 

equipment) and airborne and surface collision resolution advisories. 

A-31 5.2.2 

1st paragraph 

Real time weather information and maps are available via SWIM on the flight deck. 

A-32 6 

5th bullet 

Changes in airspace structures and route definitions in addition to the positions and predicted timebased trajectories are updated and registered within the NASCR for easy access via SWIM. 

A-33 6.1.2 

4th paragraph 

Properly equipped aircraft receive an increased number of services via data link. These 

services includes certain ATC clearances, current and forecast weather, NOTAMs and 

hazardous weather warnings, updated charts, SUA status, and other required data that are 

up-linked (or data-loaded) to the aircraft to facilitate better planning. 

A-34 6.2.2 

4th paragraph 

For properly-equipped aircraft, updates to navigation terrain and obstacle databases are 

provided over data link. 

A-35 7.3.3 

3rd paragraph 

Airspace sectorization changes dynamically based on weather, demand, and user preferences. These 

changes are accomplished through automated coordination (SYSCO) with all affected domestic and 

international service providers. 

 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 102 

TABLE 23.—IDENTIFICATION OF THE ROLE OF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INFORMATION—RTCA 

NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM (NAS) CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS (ConOps) 

ID NAS ConOps 

section 

Relevant text 

RM-1 1.5.2 

16th bullet 

By taking advantage of advanced information and communications capabilities, airspace 

design and underlying sector configurations are no longer constrained by the current 

geographic boundaries, particularly in high altitude. Tools and procedures are in place for 

frequent evaluation (up to several times a day) of the airspace structure and anticipated traffic 

flows, with adjustments made accordingly. This increased flexibility permits changes to the 

configuration of air traffic facilities. 

RM-2 1.5.3 

2nd bullet 

Enhanced CNS systems and automation in aircraft complement automation aids on the ground 

permitting more autonomous operations. This improved autonomy combined with greater 

ability to share information permits the workload to be distributed between service provider 

and user in a balance appropriate for the operations being conducted. 

RM-3 1.5.3 

4th bullet 

Seamless communications and coordination, coupled with information accessible through 

SWIM, allow real-time reassignment of airspace between facilities to meet contingencies such 

as equipment outages. 

RM-4 1.5.3 

7th bullet 

There are continued improvements in the collection and processing of NAS infrastructure 

data. These data are used to prioritize and schedule NAS infrastructure activities 

RM-5 1.5.3 

8th bullet 

NAS infrastructure assets (e.g., radars, communications, etc.) are assigned/reassigned 

dynamically to mitigate infrastructure problems as well as in response to changes in 

sectorization and airspace assignment. All NAS resources are registered in the NAS Common 

Reference System (NASCR), and monitored and managed through SWIM. 

RM-6 2 

8th bullet 

Infrastructure operations are performed from a national perspective 

RM-7 2 

9th bullet 

Infrastructure maintenance is performed from the viewpoint of customer requirements for the 

services with an understanding of the effects of the activities on service delivery to NAS 

infrastructure users 

RM-8 2.1.1 

1st and 2nd 

paragraphs 

TFM service providers monitor traffic, weather, and infrastructure. ... Air Traffic Control 

System Command Center (ATCSCC) service providers monitor NAS performance and adjust 

TFM initiatives as needed. 

RM-9 2.1.2 

3rd paragraph 

Because NAS users have increased flexibility in planning routes and schedules, and because 

the NAS relies less on routine restrictions and fixed routes, managing NAS resources 

becomes more dynamic and adaptive. 

RM-10 2.1.3 

2nd paragraph 

Flow-constrained areas are managed by allocating access, collaborative rerouting, and 

realigning sectors and associated resources. 

RM-11 2.4.3 NAS infrastructure assets are assigned/reassigned dynamically to mitigate infrastructure 

problems as well as in response to changes to in sectorization, traffic demand, and airspace 

assignment. SWIM provides access to all NAS management and resource information. 

RM-12 2.2.1 

3rd paragraph 

Working with service providers, users better manage flight operations by collaboratively 

evaluating the situation, developing reroutes around the flow constrained areas, and providing 

a more refined allocation of flights to the reroutes 

RM-13 2.5.1 In coordination with the National Operations Control Center (NOCC), infrastructure 

management (IM) service providers monitor NAS infrastructure performance and determine 

needed actions. Service providers perform remote management and monitoring of systems, 

while others perform onsite maintenance for fault correction, preventive maintenance, and 

equipment installation and removal. 

RM-14 2.5.3 NAS infrastructure assets are assigned/reassigned dynamically to mitigate infrastructure 

problems as well as to respond to changes to in sectorization and airspace assignment. SWIM 

provides access to all NAS 

Management and resource information. The redundancy in the NAS is applied expeditiously 

to maintain flow and reduce operational impact 

RM-15 3.1.1 paragraph 3 There is real-time sharing of system demand and the virtual ATM information, enabling 

service providers to collaboratively interact with the user and to mutually develop solutions to 

problems. ... User flight planning systems account for system constraints such as flow 

restrictions, hazardous weather, SUA and infrastructure outages. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 103 

TABLE 23.—IDENTIFICATION OF THE ROLE OF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INFORMATION—RTCA 

NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM (NAS) CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS (ConOps) 

ID NAS ConOps 

section 

Relevant text 

RM-16 5.3.2 

7th paragraph 

Data from SWIM allows service providers to monitor traffic demand, NAS infrastructure 

status, and other conditions in order to allocate resources, including changes in staffing. 

Service providers also update the NAS about the available capacity of airport and surrounding 

airspace resources and the current status of SUA. This facilitates more effective collaboration 

with FOCs and improved formulation of TFM agreements. 

RM-17 6.3.2 

4th paragraph 

With the completion of the National Airspace Redesign, airspace is restructured to meet 

future traffic requirements. Static restrictions due to fixed sector boundaries are reduced or 

eliminated. The airspace structure is frequently evaluated and adjusted in anticipation of 

expected traffic flows, or in response to weather and NAS infrastructure changes. 

Additionally, airspace boundaries are adjusted dynamically without respect to facilities, for 

transient events or circumstances for limited periods of time. 

NASA/CR—2010-216326 105 

Appendix C.—Hierarchical Diagrams of Functional Requirements 

This appendix contains the functional analysis of the L-band communication system presented as a 

series of hierarchical diagrams. The “L” preceding all of the numerical functional levels is used to 

represent L-band.” 

The analysis and diagrams are adopted from the National Airspace System (NAS) Communications 

System Safety Hazard Analysis and Security Threat Analysis document (Ref. 54). 

Solid blocks in the diagrams represent system functions that are part of the L-band system scope 

assumptions; background blocks show NAS functions that are currently not part of the L-band 

functionality. 

Figure 38.—L-band communications system high level. 

Figure 39.—Decomposition of use L-band communications system (transmit/receive messages). 

L.1.1.4

Transceive

Fixed to Fixed

Message

L.1.1 Use L‐Band

Communications System

L.1 Provide ATC

Communications over L‐Band

Communications System

L.1.2 Operate L‐Band

Communications System

L.1.1.1

Transceive

Fixed to

Mobile

Message

L.1.1.3

Transceive

Mobile to Mobile

Message

L. 1.2.2

Maintain L‐Band

Communications

System

L. 1.2.3

Configure L‐Band

Communications

System

L. 1.2.1

Monitor L‐Band

Communications

System

L.1.1.2

Transceive

Mobile to

Fixed

Message

L.1.1 Use L‐Band

Communications System

(Transmit/Receive Messages)

L.1.1.1.1

Transceive

Fixed to

Airborne

Mobile

Message

L.1.1.2.1

Transceive

Airborne

Mobile to

Fixed  

Message

L.1.1.1.2

Transceive

Fixed to

On‐ground

Mobile

Message

L.1.1.1

Transceive

Fixed to

Mobile

Message

L.1.1.3

Transceive

Mobile to Mobile

Message

L.1.1.2

Transceive

Mobile to

Fixed

Message

L.1.1.4

Transceive

Fixed to Fixed

Message

L.1.1.2.2

Transceive

On‐ground

Mobile to

Fixed  

Message

L.1.1.3.1

Transceive

Airborne

Mobile to

Airborne

Mobile

Message

L.1.1.3.3

Transceive

On‐ground

Mobile  to

Airborne

Mobile

Message

L.1.1.3.2

Transceive

Airborne

Mobile to

On‐ground

Mobile

Message

L.1.1.3.4

Transceive

On‐ground

Mobile to

On‐ground

Mobile

Message
NASA/CR—2010-216326 106 

Figure 40.—Decomposition of transceive fixed-to-mobile message. 

L.1.1.1.1.1

Transceive

Fixed to Airborne

AircraftMessage

L.1.1.1.1.1.1

Transceive

Fixed to

Airborne

AircraftVoice

Message

L.1.1.1.1.1.2

Transceive

Fixed to

Airborne

AircraftData

Message

L.1.1.1.2 .1

Transceive

Fixed to On‐ground  

AircraftMessage

L.1.1.1.2 .2

Transceive

Fixed to On‐ground  

Vehicles Message

L.1.1.1.1

Transceive

Fixed to

Airborne

Mobile

Message

L.1.1.1.2

Transceive

Fixed to

On‐ground

Mobile

Message

L.1.1.1.2.1.1

Transceive

Fixed to On‐

ground Aircraft

Voice Message

L.1.1.1.2.1.2

Transceive

Fixed to On‐

ground Aircraft

Data Message

L.1.1.1

Transceive

Fixed to

Mobile

Message
NASA/CR—2010-216326 107 

Figure 41.—Decomposition of transceive mobile-to-fixed message. 

L.1.1.2.1.1

Transceive

Airborne

Aircraftto

Fixed Message

L.1.1.2.1.1 .1

Transceive

Airborne

Aircraftto

Fixed Voice

Message

L.1.1.2.1.1.2

Transceive

Airborne

Aircraftto

Fixed Data

Message

L.1.1.2.2 .1

Transceive

On‐ground

Aircraftto

Fixed

Message

L.1.1.1.2 .2

Transceive

On‐ground Vehicle to

Fixed Message

L.1.1.2.2 .1.1

Transceive

On‐ground

Aircraftto

Fixed Voice

Message

L.1.1.2.2 .1.2

Transceive

On‐ground

Aircraftto

Fixed Data

Message

L.1.1.2

Transceive

Mobile to

Fixed

Message

L.1.1.2.1

Transceive

Airborne

Mobile to

Fixed  

Message

L.1.1.2.2

Transceive

On‐ground

Mobile to

Fixed  

Message
NASA/CR—2010-216326 108 

Figure 42.—Decomposition of transceive airborne-mobile-to-airborne-mobile messages. 

 

L.1.1.3.1

Transceive

Airborne

Mobile to

Airborne

Mobile

Message

L.1.1.3.1 .1

Transceive

Airborne

Aircraftto

Airborne

Aircraft

Message

L.1.1.3.1 .1.1

Transceive

Airborne

Aircraftto

Airborne

AircraftVoice

Message

L.1.1.3.1 .1.2

Transceive

Airborne

Aircraftto

Airborne

AircraftData

Message
NASA/CR—2010-216326 109 

Figure 43.—Generic decomposition of transceive data message. 

Figure 44.—Generic decomposition of initiate data message. 

Figure 45.—Generic decomposition of process data message for sending. 

 

Figure 46.—Generic decomposition of send data message. 

 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.1

Initiate Data

Message

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.2

Process Data

Message for

Sending

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.3

Send Data

Message

L.1.1.x.x.x.2

Transceive Data

Message

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.5

Deliver Data

Message

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.4

Process Received

Data Message

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.1

Initiate Data Message

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.1.1

Access

Communication

System

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.1.2

Authenticate

Message Source

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.1.3

Provide Message

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.1.4

Indicate Receipt

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.1.5

Timestamp

Message

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.1.6

Specify Routing

Requirements

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.1.7

Indicate Sender

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.1.8

Provide Failure

Processing

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.2

ProcessData Message

for Sending

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.2.1

Encode Message

L.1.1. x.x.x.2.2.2

Packetize

Message

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.2.3

Compress

Message

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.2.4

Checksum

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.2.5

Provide Failure

Processing

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.3.1

Apply Routing

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.3.2

Transmit Message

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.3.5

Provide Failure

Processing

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.3

Send Data

Message

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.3.4

Receive Message

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.3.3

Transport

Message
NASA/CR—2010-216326 110 

 

Figure 47.—Generic decomposition of process received data message. 

 

Figure 48.—Generic decomposition of deliver data message. 

 

Figure 49.—Generic decomposition of provide failure processing. 

List of failure detection subfunctions 

 Authentication failures 

 Function unavailability 

 Message unintelligible or garbled 

 Message inaudible 

 Message or message components missing or faulty 

 Invalid or incorrect message components 

 Checksum failures 

 Invalid recipient 

 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.4.1

Timestamp

Message

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.4.2

Decode Message

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.4.3

Reconstitute

Packetized

Message

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.4.4

Decompress Message

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.4.5

ConfirmChecksum

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.4.6

Provide Failure

Processing

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.4

Process Received

Data Message

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.5.1

Communication

System

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.5.2

Authenticate

Message  Source

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.5.4

Indicate Incoming

Message

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.5.5

PresentMessage

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.5.6

Provide Failure

Processing

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.5.3

Provide Message

Source

Also terminate

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.5

Deliver Data

Message

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.x.x

Provide Failure

Processing

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.x.x.1

Detect Failure

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.x.x.2

Determine Correction L.1.1.x.x.x.2.x.x.3

Determine Indication

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.x.x.4

Archive Information
NASA/CR—2010-216326 111 

Figure 50.—Decomposition of operate L-band communications system. 

Figure 51.—Decomposition of monitor L-band communications system. 

L.1.2 Operate L‐Band

Communications System

L. 1.2.2

Maintain L‐Band

Communications

System

L. 1.2.3

Configure L‐Band

Communications

System

L. 1.2.1

Monitor L‐Band

Communications

System

L. 1.2.1

Monitor L‐Band

Communications

System

L. 1.2.1.2

Indicate

Status

L. 1.2.1.3

Verify

Performance

L. 1.2.1 .1

Determine

Status
NASA/CR—2010-216326 112 

Figure 52.—Decomposition of maintain L-band communications system. 

L. 1.2.2

Maintain L‐Band

Communications

System

L. 1.2.2.2

Perform

Corrective

Maintenance

L. 1.2.2 .1

Perform

Preventive

Maintenance

L. 1.2.2 .1.4

Determine

Correction

L. 1.2.2 .1.3

Determine

Indication

L. 1.2.2.1.2

Recognize Event

L. 1.2.2.1.1

Provide Logistics

Support

L. 1.2.2 .1.5

Archive

Information

L. 1.2.2 .2.4

Execute

Correction

L. 1.2.2 .2.3

Determine

Indication

L. 1.2.2.2.2

DetectAnomaly

L. 1.2.2.2.1

Provide Logistics

Support

L. 1.2.2 .2.5

Archive

Information
NASA/CR—2010-216326 113 

Figure 53.—Decomposition of configure L-band communications system. 

L. 1.2.3 .1

Determine

Capacity

L. 1.2.3

Configure L‐Band

Communications

System

L. 1.2.3.2

Configure

Communications

Path

L. 1.2.3.3

Configure

Security

L. 1.2.3 4

Configure

Parameters

These are the

parameters that are

not done in

communications

path or security

L. 1.2.3 .2.3

Disseminate

Contact/Resource

Information

L. 1.2.3.2.2

Assign Resources

L. 1.2.3 .2.1

Determine

Available

Resources

L. 1.2.3 .3.3

Disseminate

Security

Information

L. 1.2.3.3.2

Apply Security

Resources

L. 1.2.3 .3.1

Determine

Security Situation
NASA/CR—2010-216326 114 

Following is the same hierarchical decomposition presented in the outline style. Since many of the 

low-level functions are common, they are shown in Insert below, included for the first data function 

(C.1.1.1.1.1.1 Transceive Fixed-to-Airborne Aircraft Data Message) and referenced thereafter. 

Insert: Generic Data Message Functions

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.1 Initiate Data Message 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.1.1 Access Communication System 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.1.2 Authenticate Message source 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.1.3 Provide Message 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.1.4 Indicate Recipient 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.1.5 Timestamp Message 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.1.6 Specify Routing Requirements 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.1.7 Indicate Sender 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.1.8 Provide Failure Processing 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.1.8.1 Detect Failure 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.1.8.2 Determine Correction 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.1.8.3 Determine Indication 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.1.8.4 Archive Information 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.2 Process Data Message for Sending 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.2.1 Encode Message 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.2.2 Packetize Message 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.2.3 Compress Message 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.2.4 Add Checksum 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.2.5 Provide Failure Processing 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.2.5.1 Detect Failure 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.2.5.2 Determine Correction 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.2.5.3 Determine Indication 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.2.5.4 Archive Information 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.3 Send Data Message 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.3.1 Apply Routing 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.3.2 Transmit Message 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.3.3 Transport Message 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.3.4 Receive Message 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.3.5 Provide Failure Processing 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.3.5.1 Detect Failure 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.3.5.2 Determine Correction 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.3.5.3 Determine Indication 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.3.5.4 Archive Information 

L.1.1.x.x.x.x.2.4 Process Received Data Message 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.4.1 Timestamp Message 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.4.2 Decode Message 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.4.3 Reconstitute Packetized Message 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.4.4 Decompress Message 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.4.5 Confirm Checksum 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.4.6 Provide Failure Processing 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.4.6.1 Detect Failure 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.4.6.2 Determine Correction 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.4.6.3 Determine Indication 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.4.6.4 Archive Information 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.5 Deliver Data Message 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.5.1 Access Communication System 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 115 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.5.2 Authenticate Message Source 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.5.3 Provide Message Source 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.5.4 Indicate Incoming Message 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.5.5 Present Message 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.5.6 Provide Failure Processing 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.5.6.1 Detect Failure 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.5.6.2 Determine Correction 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.5.6.3 Determine Indication 

L.1.1.x.x.x.2.5.6.4 Archive Information 

L–DACS Communication System Hierarchical Function Listing

L.1 Provide ATC Communications over L-Band Communications System 

L.1.1 Use L-Band Communication System (Transmit/Receive Messages) 

L.1.1.1 Transceive Fixed to Mobile Message 

 L.1.1.1.1 Transceive Fixed to Airborne Mobile Message 

 L.1.1.1.1.1 Transceive Fixed to Airborne Aircraft Message 

 L.1.1.1.1.1.2 Transceive Fixed to Airborne Aircraft Data Message 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.1 Initiate Data Message 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.1.1 Access Communication System 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.1.2 Authenticate Message source 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.1.3 Provide Message 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.1.4 Indicate Recipient 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.1.5 Timestamp Message 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.1.6 Specify Routing Requirements 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.1.7 Indicate Sender 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.1.8 Provide Failure Processing 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.1.8.1 Detect Failure 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.1.8.2 Determine Correction 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.1.8.3 Determine Indication 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.1.8.4 Archive Information 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.2 Process Data Message for Sending 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.1 Encode Message 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.2 Packetize Message 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.3 Compress Message 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.4 Add Checksum 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.5 Provide Failure Processing 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.5.1 Detect Failure 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.5.2 Determine Correction 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.5.3 Determine Indication 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.5.4 Archive Information 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.3 Send Data Message 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.3.1 Apply Routing 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.3.2 Transmit Message 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.3.3 Transport Message 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.3.4 Receive Message 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.3.5 Provide Failure Processing 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.3.5.1 Detect Failure 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.3.5.2 Determine Correction 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.3.5.3 Determine Indication 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.3.5.4 Archive Information 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.4 Process Received Data Message 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.4.1 Timestamp Message 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 116 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.4.2 Decode Message 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.4.3 Reconstitute Packetized Message 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.4.4 Decompress Message 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.4.5 Confirm Checksum 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.4.6 Provide Failure Processing 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.4.6.1 Detect Failure 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.4.6.2 Determine Correction 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.4.6.3 Determine Indication 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.4.6.4 Archive Information 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.5 Deliver Data Message 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.5.1 Access Communication System 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.5.2 Authenticate Message Source 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.5.3 Provide Message Source 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.5.4 Indicate Incoming Message 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.5.5 Present Message 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.5.6 Provide Failure Processing 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.5.6.1 Detect Failure 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.5.6.2 Determine Correction 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.5.6.3 Determine Indication 

L.1.1.1.1.1.2.5.6.4 Archive Information 

 L.1.1.1.2 Transceive Fixed to On-Ground Mobile Message 

 L.1.1.1.2.1Transceive Fixed to On-Ground Aircraft Message 

 L.1.1.1.3.1.2 Transceive Fixed to On-Ground Aircraft Data Message 

 Insert B 

L.1.1.2 Transceive Mobile to Fixed Message 

 L.1.1.2.1 Transceive Airborne Mobile to Fixed Message 

 L.1.1.2.1.1 Transceive Airborne Aircraft to Fixed Message 

 L.1.1. 2.1.1.2 Transceive Airborne Aircraft to Fixed Data Message 

Insert B 

 L.1.1.2.2 Transceive On-Ground Mobile to Fixed Message 

 L.1.1.2.2.1 Transceive On-Ground Aircraft to Fixed Message 

 L.1.1.2.2.1.2 Transceive On-Ground Aircraft to Fixed Data Message 

 Insert B 

L.1.1.3 Transceive Mobile-Mobile Message 

 L.1.1.3.1 Transceive Airborne Mobile to Airborne Mobile Message 

 L.1.1.3.1.1 Transceive Airborne Aircraft to Airborne Aircraft Message 

 L.1.1.4.1.1.2 Transceive Airborne Aircraft to Airborne Aircraft Data Message 

 Insert 

L.1.2 Operate L-Band Communication System 

L.1.2.1 Monitor L-Band Communication System 

L.1.2.1.1 Determine Status 

L.1.2.1.2 Indicate Status 

L.1.2.1.3 Verify Performance 

L.1.2.2 Maintain L-Band Communication System 

 L.1.2.2.1 Perform Preventative Maintenance 

L.1.2.2.1.1 Provide Logistics Support 

L.1.2.2.1.2 Recognize Event 

L.1.2.2.1.3 Determine Indication 

L.1.2.2.1.4 Determine Correction 

L.1.2.2.1.5 Archive Information 

L.1.2.2.2 Perform Corrective Maintenance 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 117 

L.1.2.2.2.1 Provide Logistics Support 

L.1.2.2.2.2 Detect Anomaly 

L.1.2.2.2.3 Determine Indication 

L.1.2.2.2.4 Execute Correction 

L.1.2.2.2.5 Archive Information 

L.1.2.3 Configure L-Band Communication System 

L.1.2.3.1 Determine Capacity 

L.1.2.3.2 Configure Communication Path 

L.1.2.3.2.1 Determine Available Resources 

L.1.2.3.2.2 Assign Resources 

L.1.2.3.2.3 Disseminate Contact/Resource Information 

L.1.2.3.3 Configure Security 

L.1.2.3.3.1 Determine Security Situation 

L.1.2.3.3.2 Apply Security Resources 

L.1.2.3.3.3 Disseminate Security Information 

L.1.2.3.4 Configure Parameters 

NASA/CR—2010-216326 119 

Appendix D.—N2 Charts 

Use L-band communication 

system (transmit/receive 

messages) 

Operate L-band 

communication system 

Figure 54.—Level 2 N2 chart, L.1 L–DACS communication system. 

Transceive fixed-to-mobile 

message 

 

Transceive mobile-to-fixed 

message 

 Transceive mobile-to-mobile 

message 

Figure 55.—Level 3 N2 chart, L.1.1 provide air traffic control communications over L-band communications system. 

Transceive fixed-to-airbornemobile message 

Transceive fixed-to-onground-mobile message 

Figure 56.—Level 4 N2 chart,L.1.1.1 transceive fixed-to-mobile message. 

 Initiate Data 

Message Data Message 

Process Data 

Message for 

Sending 

Processed Data 

Message 

 Send Data 

Message 

Received Data 

Message

 Process Received 

Data Message 

Processed Received 

Data Message

 Deliver Data 

Message 

Delivered Data 

Message 

Figure 57.—Level 7 N2 chart, L.1.1.x.x.x.2 transceive data message.
Access 

Communication 

System 

Access 

Parameters 

Authenticate 

Message 

Source 

Authenticated 

Message 

Provide 

Message 

Message 

Payload 

Indicate 

Recipient 

Message with 

Addressed 

Header 

Timestamp 

Message 

Timestamped 

Message 

Specify 

Routing 

Requirements 

Routing 

Parameters 

Indicate 

Sender 

Message with 

Addressed Header 

Provide Failure 

Processing 

Message Failure Data

Figure 58.—Level 8 N2 chart, L.1.1.x.x.x.2.1 initiate data message.

NASA/CR—2010-216326 120 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 121 

Detect Failure Message Failure 

Information 

Determine Correction Message Correction 

Parameters 

 Determine Indication Message Status 

Information 

 Archive Information Archived Messages 

Figure 59.—Level 9 N2 chart, L.1.1.x.x.x.2.x.x. provide failure processing. 

Encode 

Message 

Encoded 

Message 

Packetize Message Packetized, Encoded 

Message 

 Compress Message

Compressed, 

Packetized, Encoded 

Message 

 Add Checksum 

Compressed, 

Packetized, Encoded 

Message with 

Checksum 

 Provide Failure 

Processing 

Message Failure 

Data 

Figure 60.—Level 8 N2 chart, L.1.1.x.x.x.2.2 process data message for sending. 

Apply Routing Packetized 

Message 

Transmit Message Modulated and 

Transmitted Packets 

 Transport Message Networked 

Messages 

 Receive Message 

Received and 

Demodulated 

Packets 

 Provide Failure 

Processing 

Message Failure 

Information 

Figure 61.—Level 8 N2 chart, L.1.1.x.x.x.2.3 send data message. 

Timestamp 

Message 

Timestamped 

Messages 

Decode Message Decoded 

Messages 

 

Reconstitute 

Packetized 

Message 

Message 

Packets 

 

 Decompress 

Message 

Uncompressed 

Messages 

 

 Confirm 

Checksum 

Message 

Payloads 

 

Provide 

Failure 

Processing 

Failure 

Indication 

Figure 62.—Level 8 N2 chart, L.1.1.x.x.x.2.4 process received data message. 

 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 122 

Access 

Communication 

System 

 

 

Authenticate 

Message Source 

Message Source 

Authentication 

 Provide Message 

Source Message Source 

 

Indicate 

Incoming 

Message 

Indicated 

Incoming 

Message 

 

 Present Message Message 

Presented 

 

Provide 

Failure 

Processing 

Failure 

Indication

Figure 63.—Level 8 N2 chart, L.1.1.x.x.x.2.5 deliver data message. 

Transceive Airborne Mobile to 

Fixed Message 

Transceive On-Ground 

Mobile to Fixed Message 

Figure 64.—Level 4 N2 chart, L.1.1.2 transceive mobile-to-fixed message. 

Monitor L-Band 

Communication System 

Maintain L-Band 

Communication System 

 Configure L-Band 

Communication System 

Figure 65.—Level 3 N2 chart, L.1.2 operate L-band communication system. 

Determine Status Status Information 

Indicate Status Status Information 

 Verify 

Performance 

Performance 

Information 

Figure 66.—Level 4 N2 chart, L.1.2.1 monitor L-band communication system. 

Perform 

Preventative 

Maintenance 

Perform Corrective 

Maintenance 

Figure 67.—Level 4 N2 chart, L.1.2.2 maintain L-band communication system. 

 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 123 

Provide Logistics 

Support 

Recognize Event 

 Determine 

Indication Status Information 

 Determine 

Correction 

Corrective 

Information 

 Archive 

Information 

Maintenance 

Log Information

Figure 68.—Level 5 N2 chart, L.1.2.2.1 perform preventative maintenance. 

Provide Logistics 

Support 

Detect Anomaly Sensor Information 

 Determine 

Indication Status Information 

 Execute Correction

Maintenance 

Correction 

Information 

 Archive 

Information 

Maintenance 

Log Information

Figure 69.—Level 5 N2 chart, L.1.2.2.2 perform corrective maintenance. 

Determine 

Capacity Capacity Information 

Configure 

Communication Path 

Configuration 

Information 

 Configure Security Security Configuration 

Information 

 Configure Parameters 

Parameter 

Configuration 

Information 

Figure 70.—Level 4 N2 chart, L.1.2.3 configure L-band communication system. 

Determine 

Available 

Resources 

Resource 

Information 

Assign Resources Resource Assignment 

Information 

 

Disseminate 

Contact/Resource 

Information 

Contact/Resource 

Information 

Figure 71.—Level 5 N2 chart, L.1.2.3.2 configure communication path. 

Determine 

Security Situation 

Security Situation 

Parameters 

Apply Security 

Resources 

Resource Security 

Information 

 

Disseminate 

Security 

Information 

Security Information 

Figure 72.—Level 5 N2 chart, L.1.2.3.3 configure security. 

NASA/CR—2010-216326 125 

Appendix E.—Spectrum Requirements for Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) 

communications 

This appendix presents Section 5 (Spectrum Requirements for UAS Communications) and Section 6 

(Conclusions) of the proposed changes to Annex 16 of 5B/296-E in Reference 35. 

E.1 Single UA Throughput Needs 

E.1.1 Methodology 1 

The two tables below are based on the results of the Annex 1 (of Ref. 35). 

TABLE 24.—TERRESTRIAL ESTIMATED NONPAYLOAD THROUGHPUT 

REQUIREMENTS OF A SINGLE UNMANNED AIRCRAFT IN BITS/S 

Proposal Command and control Air traffic control relay Sense-and-avoid Video/weather radar 

Airport surface 12 167 2×4855 9 120 270 000 

30 997 

Low altitude 12 167 2×4855 9 120 270 000a

30 997 

Medium altitude 5 062 2×4855 9 120 27 000 

23 892 

High altitude 5 062 2×4855 9 120 27 000 

23 892 a

A factor representing a percentage value of video and weather radar data rate used at the low altitude could apply and is taken

into account in Annex 3 of the Ref. 35. 

TABLE 25.—SATELLITE ESTIMATED NONPAYLOAD THROUGHPUT 

REQUIREMENTS OF A SINGLE UNMANNED AIRCRAFT IN BITS/S 

Proposal Command and control Air traffic control relay Sense-and-avoid Video/weather radar

Medium altitude 5 062 2×4855 9 120 27 000 

23 892 

High altitude 5 062 2×4855 9 120 27 000 

23 892 

E.1.2 Methodology 2 

TABLE 26.—MAXIMUM NONPAYLOAD THROUGHPUT 

REQUIREMENTSa

 OF A SINGLE UNMANNED AIRCRAFT IN BITS/S 

Unmanned aircraft 

 type 

Control and 

Navaids 

Air traffic control 

relay 

Nonpayload surveillance 

 datab

Large 2 437 4 855 287 849 

Medium 2 437 4 855 279 120 

Small 1 862 0 0 

a

Averaged over all operational phases.

b

Includes video, weather radar, sense–and-avoid, etc.

E.2 Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Deployment Scenario 

E.2.3 Methodology 1 

Table 27 and Table 28 are based on the results of the Annex 2 [of the source document]. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 126 

TABLE 27.—UNMANNED AIRCRAFTY (UA) DENSITY 

(60% OF UA AVAILABLE FOR OPERATION) 

 UA/km2 

At surface (3 UAs at an airport) 

0.0002395 

0–FL50 (1500 m) 0.0004017 

FL50–FL195 (1500 to 6000 m) 0.0001560 

>FL 195 (6000 m) 0.0000644 

Total density 0.0008616 

TABLE 28.—NUMBER OF UNMANNED AIRCRAFT 

PER FOOTPRINT OF THE SATELLITE 

 60% of UA available for operation 

 GEO LEO or GEO multispot 

without small 1711 106 

E.2.4 Methodology 2 

TABLE 29.—NUMBER OF UNMANNED AIRCRAFT (UA) 

OPERATING AT PEAK TIMESa

UA type Per square 

kilometre 

Per spot beamb In regional-coverage 

beamc

Large 0.0000440 21 341 

Medium 0.0001950 94 1 515 

Small 0.0008031 386 0 

Total 0.0010421 501 1 856 a

Assumed to be 75% of total population of each UA type. 

b

Circular footprint 391 km in radius is assumed. 

c

Conterminous U.S. only. Small UA cannot carry regional-coverage 

SATCOM terminals. 7 800 000 km3

 (3 000 000 square mile) 

coverage is assumed. 

E.3 Aggregate Assessment of Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Spectrum Needs 

E.3.5 Methodology 1 

The following table provides the UAS spectrum needs using the Methodology 1 and calculation 

presented in Annex 3 [of the source document]. It has to be noted that the video requirements is not yet 

decided as mandatory by the civil aviation authorities. 

TABLE 30.—AGGREGATE SPECTRUM REQUIREMENTS 

Terrestrial needs, MHz4

 15.9 18.1 34 

Satellite needs, MHza 29 17 46 a

The assessment of these spectrum requirements have been based on 

assumptions described in the PDN report ITU-R M.[UAS-SPEC] (cells/spots 

radius, frequency reuse factor, etc.). Regarding sharing studies on WRC–11 

Agenda item 1.3 in specific bands, these assumptions and therefore the 

spectrum requirements could be refined.
NASA/CR—2010-216326 127 

The detail of those requirements is shown in the figures below. 

Figure 73.—Links involved for line of sight (LOS). Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. 

Figure 74.—Links involved for beyond line-of-sight (BLOS) via satellite (with onboard processing). 

Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. 

ATC

UA

Remote PILOT

1

4

3

2

Satellite

Spectrum requirement

PILOT/SAT (UL+DL) =1+4 = 24,5 MHz

+

SAT/UAV (UL+DL) = 2+3= 24,5 MHz

TOTAL BLOS = 2 x 24,5 MHz = 49 MHz 

Forward link : 

1. Uplink : Remote PILOT to satellite

2. Downlink : satellite to UA

Return link: 

3. Uplink : UA to satellite

4. Downlink : satellite to Remote 

PILOT

ATC

UAV

Control Station

Uplink : CS to UAV

1. CS to UAV

Downlink : UAV to CS

2. UAV to CS

Spectrum requirement

LOS = 1+2 = 34 MHz

1

2
NASA/CR—2010-216326 128 

Figure 75.—Links involved for beyond line-of-sight (BLOS) via satellite 

(without onboard processing). Acronyms are defined in Appendix A. 

 The spectrum requirements figures for BLOS cases correspond to satellite architectures with 

multi-spot coverage and either on-board processing as illustrated in Figure 73 (allowing direct 

[connection] between any UA and its CS) or no onboard processing as illustrated in Figure 74 (in which 

the CS connects to the earth station through wired/wireless line).24

E.3.6 Methodology 2 

Table 31 summarizes the bandwidth requirements calculated for each of the three major functional 

communications categories (Control and NavAids, air traffic control relay, and nonpayload Surveillance 

data) in each of the three alternative system implementations (LOS, BLOS satellite spot beam, and BLOS 

satellite regional beam). Both satellite systems, particularly the regional-beam one, are clearly much more 

bandwidth-intensive than the terrestrial system. A hybrid system consisting of terrestrial and satellite 

components would have an aggregate bandwidth requirement somewhere between the “pure terrestrial” 

and “pure satellite” extremes. That hybrid bandwidth requirement would depend on the allocation of 

functions between the terrestrial and satellite components of the system, and on whether the satellite 

component has a spot-beam or regional-beam architecture. The assumed spot-beam system has a beam 

footprint of 391 km (243 mi) in radius. The regional-coverage beam has a beam footprint of 

7 800 000 km2

 (3 000 000 mi2). 

TABLE 31.—METHODOLOGY 2—COMPARISON OF AGGREGATE 

BANDWIDTH REQUIREMENTS 

Functional category Aggregate nationwide bandwidth requirement in megahertz 

Line-of-sight 

terrestrial system 

Beyond line-of-sight satellite system 

Spot beam Regional beama

Command and control 1.61 11.76 19.62 

Air traffic control relay 2.72 8.48 34.42 

Sense and avoid 23.51 28.47 114.89 

Total 27.84 48.71 168.93 

a

Regional-beam system does not support small unmanned aircraft. 

 

24Wireless connections between the gateway and the CS may be needed in some cases. In such cases the 

spectrum requirement may be modifed. 

ATC

UAV

Remote PILOT

1

4

3

2

Satellite

Spectrum requirement

PILOT/SAT (UL+DL) =1+4= 22.5 MHz

+

SAT/UAV (UL+DL) = 2+3= 22.5 MHz

TOTAL BLOS = 2 x 22.5MHz = 45MHz

Forward link : 

1. Uplink : Remote PILOT to satellite

2. Downlink : satellite to UAV

Return link : 

3. Uplink : UAV to satellite

4. Downlink : satellite to Remote 

PILOT
NASA/CR—2010-216326 129 

E.4 Conclusion 

Based on the assumptions and results of Methodology 1 and Methodology 2 above, the total UAS 

spectrum requirements are 

 34 MHz for a terrestrial LOS system 

 49 MHz for a spot-beam satellite system 

 169 MHz for a regional-beam satellite system, which can be shared between several satellites, 

thereby reducing the overall spectrum requirement 

NASA/CR—2010-216326 131 

Appendix F.—L-Band Spectrum Applicability for Unmanned Aircraft System 

(UAS) Applications 

This section is adopted from Reference 34. In support of spectrum selection and allocation the SC–

203 conducted a comparative analysis of various frequency bands rating them in respect to suitability for 

unmanned aircraft system (UAS) applications. A relatively high rating was assigned to a lower part of the 

L-band (960 to 1024 MHz). The rationale for this relatively high rating is as follows: 

The band is highly attractive for future UAS control use from a regulatory standpoint. It consists 

entirely of controlled-access aeronautical spectrum with an AM(R)S allocation. Its current worldwide 

spectrum allocation is internationally standardized and consistent from region to region. 

Opportunities for finding bandwidth for AM(R)S in the 960 to 1024 MHz band depend primarily on 

exploiting certain characteristics of the DME and TACAN transmitters that are its principal current users. 

First, in the 979 to 1024 MHz part of the band all of those transmitters are at fixed ground locations. This 

would facilitate geographical frequency coordination between those DME/TACAN assignments and a 

future AM(R)S communications system. Second, a transmitted DME signal occupies a bandwidth 

narrower than its nominal 1-MHz channel width. If DME receivers are sufficiently selective, there may 

exist between adjacent DME channels a gap that could be utilized for AM(R)S (or UAS CC). Even if that 

is not the case for all DME receivers, many geographical areas have numerous unused DME channels that 

might be usable in their entirety by AM(R)S or UAS CC without RFI to or from DME. Consequently the 

band has been awarded a neutral rating in the “Potentially Available Bandwidth” category. 

The band scores relatively well for link range, capacity, latency, and availability. Its LOS limitation 

and its relatively high free-space propagation loss (in comparison with 108 to 137 MHz) result in neutral 

ratings for range and capacity, but its terrestrial usage and its freedom from significant atmospheric loss 

earn it favorable ratings for latency and availability. 

Co-site compatibility on aircraft is a major concern in this band. A 960 to 1024 MHz UA-borne 

communications transmitter would pose an interference risk to a collocated DME or UAT receiver and, 

most notably, to any collocated air traffic control radar beacon system (ATCRBS) or Mode S receiver 

operating at 1030 MHz. Present-day manned aircraft typically protect their onboard L-band (960 to 1215 

MHz) devices from mutual co-site interference by means of a suppression bus that blanks the receivers 

each time a collocated in-band transmitter emits a pulse. If the transmitter has too high a duty cycle, this 

pulse-blanking method could unacceptably degrade receiver performance. If future airborne UA Control 

transmitters operate in the 960 to 1024 MHz band, they may have to employ some combination of power 

control, RF filtering, and/or low-duty-cycle operation to avoid interfering with collocated DME, UAT, 

and 1030-MHz receivers. The problem is likely to be more severe when the UA Control transmitter 

operates near the upper end of the 960 to 1024 MHz band, where RF filtering would afford the least 

protection to the 1030-MHz receivers. This co-site criterion is the only one for which the 960 to 1024 

MHz band has received an unfavorable rating during the evaluation. However, it should be noted that the 

need for airborne transmissions in this band could be “finessed”, possibly at the cost of an additional 

airborne antenna, if a split-band UAS CC system is developed. For example, if uplink transmissions are 

situated in band 960 to 1024 MHz, but downlink transmissions are situated at C-band, the airborne cosite 

interference problem in this band would be eliminated.25 

Because compact airborne antennas are feasible in the 960 to 1024 MHz band, it has received a 

favorable SWAP rating. New 960 to 1024 MHz ground radios would have to be installed, but they could 

 

25 This would shift the airborne cosite problem to a higher band, but this might be desirable from an 

overall systems engineering perspective. C-band, for example, might offer the opportunity for greater 

downlink bandwidth (thereby matching the projected asymmetry in uplink and downlink data rates), and 

the UAS community might willingly forgo MLS. Furthermore, a C-band downlink could more easily 

support ground-based sectorized, multi-beam, or “smart” antennas designed to achieve high gain on the 

downlink, thereby allowing lower airborne transmit power and an overall reduction in background noise 

level for other users of the spectrum. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 132 

cover most of the NAS from the existing ground sites used by VHF/UHF ATC A/G radios, so the band 

has been given a neutral rating under both of the “cost” criteria in the matrix. The band’s inherent security 

is deemed to be no worse than average for terrestrial A/G radio links, so a neutral rating has been given 

for that criterion as well. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 133 

Appendix G.—References 

1. National Airspace System: Concept of Operations and Vision for the Future of Aviation. First ed., 

RTCA, Washington, DC, 2002. 

2. Concept of Operations for the Next Generation Air Transportation System. Version 2.0, Joint 

Planning and Development Office, June 13, 2007 

3. Global Air Traffic Management Operational Concept. ICAO Document 9854, 2005. 

4. Operating Concept of the Mobile Aviation Communication Infrastructure Supporting ATM Beyond 

2015, EUROCONTROL, 30 April 2002. 

5. Communications Operating Concept and Requirement for the Future Radio System (COCR Version 

2.0), EUROCONTROL/FAA Future Communications Study Operational Concepts and Requirements 

Team, ACP/1-IP/5, May 2007. 

6. Data Communications Safety and Performance Requirements (SPR) Draft E (FAA Evaluation 

Release) 30 April 2009. 

7. Final Program Requirements for Data Communications, FAA, May 13, 2009. 

8. National Airspace System: System Engineering Manual. Version 3.1, Federal Aviation 

Administration ATO Operations Planning, June 6, 2006. 

9. System Requirements Document, Next Generation Air/Ground Communications (NEXCOM) 

Version 2.0. FAA–E–2958, FAA, Oct. 22, 2003. 

10. FAA’s NextGen Implementation Plan 2009. NextGen Integration and Implementation Office, 

Washington, DC, Revised Feb. 10, 2009. 

11. FCI Aeronautical Data Services Definition Task Report. 2043–0001, ITT Corp., Mar. 31, 2009. 

12. Next Generation Air Transportation (NextGen) System Integrated Work Plan (IWP) 

http://www.jpdo.gov/iwp/IWP_V1.0_No_Appendices.pdf 

13. National Airspace System (NAS) Enterprise Architecture https://nasea.faa.gov/ 

14. Safety and Performance Requirements Standard for Air Traffic Data Link Services in Continental 

Airspace (Continental SPR Standard). RTCA DO–290, 2004. 

15. Gilbert, Tricia, et al.: Future Aeronautical Communication Infrastructure Technology Investigation. 

NASA/CR—2008-215144, 2008. 

16. National Airspace System, System Requirements Specifications. NAS SR–1000, Revision B 

(Functional View), NAS Architecture 6, FAA/DOT, June 2008. 

17. AS–IS System View (SV–2)—Existing and Near-Term (2009–2010) Telecommunications 

Infrastructure. Presented by ATO–W, Telecommunications Services Group (TSG), NAS Enterprise 

Architecture Conference. June 24, 2009. 

18. Stratoti, Stephen D.: NAS Enterprise Architecture, NextGen 2025 System Interface Description 

SV–1p, System Context, FAA, June 24, 2009. 

19. VHF Air-Ground Communications System Improvements Alternatives Study and Selection of 

Proposals for Future Action, RTCA DO–225, 1994. 

20. Fistas, Nikos; Phillips, Brent; and Budinger, James: Future Communications Study—Action Plan 17. 

Final Conclusions and Recommendations Report, DASC2007–4B6. 

21. Anderson, Gregg: Data Communications, How We Want to Fly! Data Link Users Forum, FAA, 

Feb. 3, 2010. 

22. Phillips, Brent; and Budinger, James: NextGen Air/Ground Communications Research, An Overview 

for FAA/John Marksteiner. FAA and NASA Glenn Research Center, Aug. 26, 2009. 

23. Gilbert, Tricia, et al.: Identification of Technologies for Provision of Future Aeronautical 

Communications. NASA/CR—2006-214451 (TR06027), 2006. 

24. Gilbert, Tricia, et. al.: Additional Technologies and Investigations for Provision of Future 

Aeronautical Communications, NASA/CR—2008-214987, 2008. 

25. Delivering NextGen. FAA Collaborative Air Traffic Management, Jan. 29, 2009. 

26. NAS EA 2025 OV–1 & OV–2: Operational Context. MITRE/CAASD, FAA NAS EA Conference, 

June 24, 2009. 
NASA/CR—2010-216326 134 

27. Zakrzewski, Ed. ITT, “2025 System View (SV-2), NAS Enterprise Architecture Conference, June 24, 

2009. 

28. Hritz, Mike: System Wide Information Management (SWIM). SWIM TIM on Infrastructure and 

Technology, FAA, May 14, 2008. 

29. Zelkin, Natalie; and Henriksen, Stephen: L-Band System Engineering—Preliminary Safety and 

Security Risk Assessment and Mitigation. NASA/CR–2010-216327, 2010. 

30. Delille, Francois: Flight Object, Interoperability and SWIM. Air Traffic Alliance—a New Way of 

Thinking. Thales Air Systems, ICNS 2007 Conference, Herndon, May 1–3, 2007. 

31. ICAO Aeronautical Communications Panel 18th meeting of the Working Group F, Montreal, Canada, 

24 March – 3 April 2009. 

32. NAS-Wide Information Services (NWIS) Architecture Development, CNS–ATM TASK 15, 

TR03010, ITT Industries, Advanced Engineering and Sciences, Feb. 22, 2003. 

33. Signal-in-Space Minimum Aviation System Performance Standards (MASPS) for Advanced VHF 

Digital Data Communications Including Compatibility With Digital Voice Techniques, RTCA 

DO–224B, 2005, 

34. Control and Communications Product Team: SC–203 Unmanned Aircraft Systems. Issue Paper 

SC203-CC011_UAS Spectrum_vO_15May09, UAS Spectrum, RTCA, Inc. 

35. Preliminary Draft New Report ITU–R M [UAS–SPEC], Characteristics of unmanned aircraft systems 

(UAS) and Spectrum requirements to support their safe operation in non-segregated airspaces, 

Document No. USWP5B09–25, ITU, Aug. 4, 2009 

36. RTCA DO–304. Guidance Material and Considerations for Unmanned Aircraft Systems. Washington, 

DC, USA: RTCA. 2007. 

37. DeGarmo, Matt: Operational Services and Environmental Definition (OSED) for Unmanned Aircraft 

Systems (UAS), Draft, 224–09/SC203–036, RTCA, Inc., Oct. 23, 2009. 

38. http://www.eurocontrol.int/communications/public/standard_page/LDACS.html 

39. Pouzet, Jacky (Head of CoE/CN/COM Unit): Future Aeronautical Communication System—FCI: 

Update on European Activities. DLK Users Forum, Brussels, Belgium, Sept. 2009. 

40. Fistas, Nikos: Future Aeronautical Communication System—FCI. 9th ICNS Conference, Arlington, 

VA, 2009. 

41. European Air Traffic Management Master Plan. Ed. 1, 2009. 

42. NextGen Mid-Term Implementation Task Force Interim Report. RTCA, Washington, DC, 2009. 

43. World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC-07), Geneva, 22 October - 16 November 2007, 

Agenda of the Conference 

44. Biggs, Michael: Spectrum Issues and WRC–07 Preparation. Presented at the 2007 ICNS Conference, 

Session J: Aviation Spectrum, Herndon, VA, 2007. 

45. Roberts, Darren. B-AMC Project Deliverable D1 Draft 1.0, Mileridge, August 14, 2007. 

46. Systematic Interference Investigations, DLR and USG, January 31, 2008. 

47. Proposed L-Band Interference Scenarios, v.1.0, DLR, February 2008. 

48. Dobrosavljevic, Zoran. Roke Manor Research, Ltd. DME and B-AMC Co-Existence Study Report 

Edition: 2.0, Roke Manor, February 28, 2008. 

49. University of Salzburg. Draft B-AMC Frequency Plan, March 27, 2008. 

50. Sajatovic, Miodrag, et al.: L-DACS1 System Definition Proposal: Deliverable D3 –Design 

Specifications for L-DACS1 Prototype, Edition 1.0, Frequentis, DLR, University of Salzburg, and 

Selex, April 27 2009, p.13. 

51. LDACS1 D2 Final Deliverable Edition: 1.0, Frequentis, DLR, University of Salzburg, and Selex, 

February 13, 2009 

52. L–DACS2 System Definition Proposal: Deliverable D1 Edition 0.34, EGIS AVIA, March 11, 2009 

53. L–DACS2 Transmitter and Receiver Prototype Equipment Specifications: Deliverable D3 Edition 

1.2, EGIS AVIA, June 18, 2009 

54. National Airspace System Communications System Safety Hazard Analysis and Security Threat 

Analysis. Version 1.0, FAA, Feb. 21, 2006. 
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved 

OMB No. 0704-0188 

The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the 

data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this 

burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. 

Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB 

control number. 

PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. 

1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY)

01-09-2010 

2. REPORT TYPE

Final Contractor Report 

3. DATES COVERED (From - To)

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

L-Band Digitial Aeronautical Communications System Engineering--Concepts of Use, 

Systems Performance, Requirements, and Architectures 

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

5b. GRANT NUMBER

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

6. AUTHOR(S)

Zelkin, Natalie; Henriksen, Stephen 

5d. PROJECT NUMBER

NCC05CA85C 

5e. TASK NUMBER

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

WBS 031102.02.03.02.0677.09 

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

ITT Corporation Advanced Engineering & Sciences Division 

12975 Worldgate Drive 

Herndon, Virginia 20170 

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION

 REPORT NUMBER

E-17260 

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

Washington, DC 20546-0001 

10. SPONSORING/MONITOR'S

 ACRONYM(S)

NASA 

11. SPONSORING/MONITORING

 REPORT NUMBER

NASA/CR-2010-216326 

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Unclassified-Unlimited 

Subject Category: 04 

Available electronically at http://gltrs.grc.nasa.gov 

This publication is available from the NASA Center for AeroSpace Information, 443-757-5802

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

14. ABSTRACT

This NASA Contractor Report summarizes and documents the work performed to develop concepts of use (ConUse) and high-level system 

requirements and architecture for the proposed L-band (960 to 1164 MHz) terrestrial en route communications system. This work was 

completed as a follow-on to the technology assessment conducted by NASA Glenn Research Center and ITT for the Future 

Communications Study (FCS). ITT assessed air-to-ground (A/G) communications concepts of use and operations presented in relevant 

NAS-level, international, and NAS-system-level documents to derive the appropriate ConUse relevant to potential A/G communications 

applications and services for domestic continental airspace. ITT also leveraged prior concepts of use developed during the earlier phases of 

the FCS. A “middle-out” functional architecture was adopted by merging the functional system requirements identified in the “bottom-up” 

assessment of existing requirements with those derived as a result of the “top-down” analysis of ConUse and higher level functional 

requirements. Initial end-to-end system performance requirements were derived to define system capabilities based on the functional 

requirements and on NAS-SR-1000 and the Operational Performance Assessment conducted as part of the COCR. A high-level notional

architecture of the L-DACS supporting A/G communication was derived from the functional architecture and requirements.

15. SUBJECT TERMS

Aircraft communication; Wireless communications; Air traffic control 

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF

 ABSTRACT

UU 

18. NUMBER

 OF 

 PAGES

151 

19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON

STI Help Desk (email:help@sti.nasa.gov) 

a. REPORT

U 

b. ABSTRACT

U 

c. THIS 

PAGE

U 

19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (include area code)

443-757-5802 

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98)

Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39-18