WRITTEN QUESTION P-3428/97 by Georg Jarzembowski (PPE) to the Commission (21 October 1997)

Subject: GNSS Satellite Navigation Systems

The EU is developing the European Geostationary Navigation Overlay System (EGNOS). This is the European component of the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS-1), an extension of the GPS and GLONAS military systems to include civil systems. In the longer term GNSS-1 is due be replaced by a global civil satellite navigation system (GNSS-2); this includes a European component which can be operated by the Europeans independently, in the event that no solution can be reached with the USA which is acceptable to the EU. The Commission's final decision is to be made dependent in part on the results of a cost-benefit analysis.

In view of the above, will the Commission say:

1. To what extent is a useful agreement with the USA in the offing, and how long will the Commission be able to wait for a solution involving the USA without jeopardizing European interests?

2. Is the Commission aware that the European civil aviation sector, one of the main potential buyers of navigation services, considers that the objective of the EGNOS project can already be attained using existing technology, i.e. by using the full potential of the GPS system backed up by on-board augmentation, and why does it therefore insist of the development of the former?

3. How can the Commission ensure that the costs arising from the EGNOS project are not passed on to the airlines, even though the latter do not expect any additional benefits from EGNOS?

4. Why are the limited financial and technical resources available not already being used to develop the distinctly more modern and forward-looking GNSS-2 instead of the GNSS-1 system?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (3 December 1997)

1. The Commission is involved in exploratory discussions with the American administration on a wide range of issues relating to the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS), including the question of whether a guaranteed level of service from their GPS satellite system is possible. It is too early to take a view on the likely outcome.

2. The discussions, organised in the framework of the new trans-Atlantic agenda, also aim at establishing the possibility for European industry to participate in this new emerging field. Discussions with the United States also promote European interests in the second generation system, GNSS2, on which work has already started. A communication on the implementation of a trans-European positioning and navigation system together with an action plan for GNSS will soon be presented by the Commission. This will deal, inter alia, with strategic issues, including our negotiations with the United States.

3. The Commission considers that EGNOS will have benefits for the aviation community. Studies have demonstrated that the use of existing GPS technology can provide benefits only for some phases of navigation, and crucially, the types of GPS on-board augmentations available would not be certifiable for safety critical applications or sole-means navigation. The essential component missing to certify this equipment is the integrity information which is provided by EGNOS. Many airports not equipped with all weather landing equipment will be able to offer such a capacity through EGNOS. Although aviation accidents are fortunately rare, a substantial proportion are due to the inadequacy of conventional navigation aids.

4. The fact that GNSS/EGNOS potentially offers a 'one-stop' navigation aid solution is certainly a serious consideration compared to the cost of installing various on-board systems on an aeroplane to cater for all phases of flight. GNSS will also allow the withdrawal of some expensive terrestrial navigation aids once the system is fully in place. It also combines GPS and GLONASS, for greater reliability.

5. The Commission is examining possible means of financing for EGNOS (GNSS 1). The development of EGNOS will also be multimodal. The attribution of costs between public sector and users will depend on a range of factors, including the benefits each sector may derive. There is a case for developing a system that is self-financing in the medium term.

6. As mentioned above, the Commission, in close co-operation with the European Space Agency, has already initiated preparatory work for GNSS 2, in which European industry will actively participate. It is also important to note that many EGNOS developments such as the existing geostationary satellites and the ground stations, are also likely to be used in GNSS2. Similar systems to EGNOS are being implemented in other parts of the world. If the Community stays absent and lets all the standards be set by others it will be very difficult for European industry to enter a market (whether GNSS1 or GNSS2) which in Europe alone will be worth many thousands of mecus.