Skip to main contentHome      Site Map      DOT      Ask FAA      Search

Links

ADS-B

  • WG#1
        
    Ops&Imp


  • WG#2
        
    TIS-B


  • WG#3
        
    1090MHz


  • WG#4
        
    ASA


  • WG#5
        
    UAT


  • WG#6     ADS-B MASPS


  • RFG
       

  • RTCA
        Calendar

  • Research & Technology
     Division


    Home

    Links

     

    WG 5: UAT MOPS
    Proposed Changes to DO-282


    The files that are named below are specifically identified proposed changes to the UAT MOPS (RTCA DO-282), which have been approved by Working Group 5, and each file includes change bars and/or strike-through text and/or bold underlined text where new text has been inserted, for ease in identifying the proposed changes that are being described below.

    File Name Approved Description of the Proposed Change
    Capitalization 8/6/03 During the review of the proposed UAT SARPS Technical manual, it has been pointed out that there were inconsistencies in DO-282 in the treatment of capitalization in some Tables in DO-282 that reference the names of Fields versus those of subfields.  This comment will affect numerous field names in several Tables and in paragraph text in future versions of DO-282.
    Flight Plan ID
    UAT-WP-14-02A
    4/7/04 As directed by the FAA ATC branch, Working Paper UAT-WP-14-02A should be implemented as detailed for adding a Flight Plan ID reporting element to the Mode Status message.  UAT-WP-14-02A presents a proposal for the new or revised UAT MOPS text in both the requirements and test procedures sections and was originally agreed to, and published by, a subgroup of Working Group 5 on 7 August 2002, as Working Paper UAT-WP-14-02.  WG-5 agreed during Meeting #19 to make modifications to UAT-WP-14-02 (thus producing UAT-WP-14-02A) because of concerns raised in Working Paper UAT-WP-19-02.
    1.1 4/7/04 Terms of importance in the document such as “shall” and “should” are not defined.

    Proposed Resolution: Take the definition of these terms from the ASA MASPS, RTCA DO-289 §2.4, and insert them into §1.1 as a Note:

    Note:    The use of “shall” in the body of this document indicates a requirement.  The use of “should” indicates a characteristic that is highly recommended, but is not required.
    1.3 4/7/04 Descriptions of FIS-B Services lack Detail and this document implies multiple uses of the uplink segment including FIS-B and TIS-B.  How will capacity be allocated for those broadcast or other services anticipated in the uplink segment?

    Proposed Resolution: WG-5 agreed to insert a reference to the FIS-B MASPS (RTCA DO-267) and a sentence into §1.3 indicating that: “The allocation of Ground Uplink capacity to particular types of broadcast information will be made by the appropriate regulatory authority.”

    1.3.1 8/6/03 The last MSO should be numbered 3951 in (1) Figure 1-1, (2) as the last number in the paragraph following Figure 1-1, and (3) at the end of the first sentence in the first paragraph of §1.3.3.
    2.1 4/7/04 Several subsections of §2.1 make frequent reference to ADS-b.  Since ADS-B is one service or function, such as FIS-B or TIS-B, that is supported by the UAT equipment, should the references be "UAT" instead of "ADS-B?"

    Proposed Resolution: Changes from "ADS-B" references to "UAT" were made in sections 2.1.7, 2.1.9, 2.1.11 and 2.1.12.

    2.1.11
    Table 2-1
    4/7/04 During the review of Table 2-1 involving a discussion of Antenna Diversity by the ICAO ACP WG-C UAT Subgroup, it was agreed that Table 2-1 needed to be clarified with respect to the alternating of antennas.

    Proposed Resolutions: (1) Change the heading of the two rightmost columns to: “Intended Antenna Diversity (when Airborne for Classes A & B0-B1)

    (2) In the column headed “Transmit,” replace the word “Alternate” with the phrase “Alternating every 2 seconds.”

    (3) In the column headed “Receive,” replace the word “Alternate” with the phrase “Alternating every second.”
    2.2.2.3 8/6/03 In the second line of Note 2, change "frequency offset" to "frequency deviation"
    2.2.2.4 8/6/03 To address an issue that arose during the discussion of the UAT SARPS Technical Manual, it appears that for the sake of completeness and to rule out some potential anomalous behavior, §2.2.2.4 should be amended to include a requirement for the horizontal dimension of the eye opening as well as the vertical dimension.  Working Paper UAT-WP-15-01 discusses this proposed change and suggests changing the beginning of the text in §2.2.2.4 to read: “The minimum vertical opening …”  Additionally, add a second paragraph reading “The minimum horizontal opening of the eye diagram of the transmitted signal (measured at 978 MHz) shall be no less than 0.624 microseconds (0.65 symbol periods) when measured over an entire Long ADS-B Message containing pseudorandom payload data.
    2.2.2.5
    Figure 2-1
    4/7/04 During implementation of an operational UAT transmitter, it has become evident that the “20 dB” corner in the upper curve of Figure 2-1 during the ramp up and ramp down periods is needlessly restrictive.  Relief of this restrictive requirement is being requested.

    Proposed Resolution: It was agreed by WG-5 during Meeting 21 that the 4 by 4 bit periods in Figure 2-1, which identify the ramp up and ramp down periods, would be changed to 2 by 6 bit periods during the ramp up, and 6 by 2 bit periods during the ramp down.  Corresponding changes will be required in the text of the requirement and in the test procedures.

    2.2.2.6
    Figure 2-2
    12/8/03 (1) Numerous discussions in the UAT SARPS Subgroup regarding the use of the terms “necessary” or “occupied” bandwidth, led to the ultimate resolution of deleting references to either term.  It was agreed that Figure 2-2 would however be enhanced by adding a vertical label on the right side of the plot in Figure 2-2 indicating “250% Boundary.”

    (2) Numerous discussions in the UAT SARPS Subgroup regarding the use of the terms “necessary” or “occupied” bandwidth, led to the ultimate resolution of agreeing to replace the Note following Figure 2-2 by breaking it into two separate notes reading:

    1. 99% of the power of the UAT spectrum is contained in 1.3 MHz (+/- 0.65MHz).  This is roughly equivalent to the 20 dB bandwidth.
    2. Spurious transmission requirements begin at
      +/- 250% of the 1.3 MHz value, therefore the transmit mask requirement extends to +/- 3.25 MHz.
    2.2.3.2.2 9/17/03 Working Paper UAT-WP-15-08 proposed a format for Information Frames that would contain the incremental units of information conveyed in the UAT Ground Uplink Message.  This framework of Information Frames offers the flexibility to support various kinds of uplink information as well as a mixture of information types within each Ground Uplink Message.  WG-5 agreed during Meeting #16 with the recommendations of UAT-WP-15-08 and directed that the additions proposed in the Working Paper be made in §2.2.3.2.2 and §2.2.3.2.2.2, as appropriate.
    2.2.3.2.2.1.4 8/6/03 During the review of the proposed UAT SARPS Technical Manual, it was agreed by the UAT SARPS Subgroup that this paragraph should be re-written for clarity as: “The “UTC Coupled” flag is a 1-bit (bit 1 of byte 7) flag used to indicate whether or not the ground station 1 Pulse Per Second timing is valid.  An encoding of ONE represents that the Ground Station is UTC-Coupled (§2.2.5.1).  An encoding of ZERO represents that the Ground Station is not UTC-Coupled (§2.2.5.2).”
    2.2.4.2
    Table 2-7
    2/9/04 The number of Bytes associated with the TARGET STATE (TS) Payload Element is incorrectly stated at 5, when it should be four (4).

    Proposed Resolution: Change the number of Bytes for the TARGET STATE Payload Element to four (4).

    2.2.4.5.1.3.2(1) 4/7/04 During a review of this section by the ICAO ACP WG-C UAT Subgroup, it was suggested that this requirement be clarified to indicate that the ADDRESS QUALIFIER can only be set to ONE (indicating the use of a self-assigned, temporary address) if the participant is NOT receiving ATC Services.

    Proposed Resolution: Revise the entire requirement paragraph to read as follows: “An “ADDRESS QUALIFIER” value of ONE (binary 001) shall indicate that the message is an ADS-B Message from an aircraft that is not receiving ATC services, and that the “ADDRESS” field holds the transmitting aircraft’s self-assigned ownship temporary address.  An “ADDRESS QUALIFIER” value of ONE shall not be used when the “Receiving ATC Services Flag” (§2.2.4.5.4.13.3) is set to ONE, indicating that the Participant is receiving ATC services.”

    2.2.4.5.1.3.2(2) 12/8/03 The ground systems folks have a strong requirement that, if a participant uses a Temporary Address, that it always be the same address within one flight segment, regardless of how many times the pilot toggles the ICAO versus Temporary selection.  The reason being that having multiple Temporary addresses from the same participant in a short period of time (less than 1 minute coast time) can cause bogus conflict alerts on the ATC controller displays.  Proposed Resolution:  At the top of page 30 where the values of M(1), M(2) and TIME are described: change “at the time the temporary address option is selected” tothe first time the temporary address option is selected
    2.2.4.5.2.1.a 8/6/03 In paragraph (a), second line, change: “encode the latitude of the ADS-B Transmitting System” to “encode the latitude provided to the ADS-B Transmitting System”
    2.2.4.5.2.1.b 8/6/03 In paragraph (b), second line, change: “encode the latitude of the ADS-B Transmitting System” to “encode the longitude provided to the ADS-B Transmitting System”
    2.2.4.5.2.1.c
    Table 2-12
    12/8/03

    Two errors have been discovered in Table 2-12 during implementation of the UAT Capstone GBT.

    1. For the bit definition “1011 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111” the Longitude should be “(90+LSB) degrees West”
    2. For the bit definition “1100 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000” the Latitude should be
      ”+90 degrees (South Pole)”
    2.2.4.5.2.1.d
    Figure 2-5
    8/6/03 During the review of the proposed UAT SARPS Technical Manual, it was agreed by the UAT Subgroup that the following changes would be made to Figure 2-5 for clarity: (1) In the lower half of the figure, change "270 degrees E = 90 degrees W" to "90 degrees W" (2) In the lower half of the figure, add a label at the center of the globe indicating "N Pole"
    2.2.4.5.2.2 9/17/03
    and
    12/8/03
    (1) When transmission of Pressure Altitude is inhibited (i.e. made not-available), does that force the Altitude Type field to assume the '1' value (i.e. Geometric Altitude becomes Primary)?  The question arises due to a lack of clarity in the last sentence of the 3rd paragraph of this section (i.e. "If only one ALTITUDE TYPE is available, then that Altitude shall be indicated in the "ALTITUDE TYPE" field").  But note that the ALTITUDE TYPE field always refers to both types of altitude, by assigning one of them as "primary" (though it doesn't use that word), and the other as the SECONDARY ALTITUDE. Proposed Resolution: Change the last sentence of the 3rd paragraph to: " If only one altitude source is available, then the use of that Altitude shall be reflected in both the “ALTITUDE TYPE” and “ALTITUDE” fields.

    (2) As documented in Working Paper UAT-WP-18-01, in some cases, the UAT MOPS text includes phrases such as "if available" to describe the appropriate processing of Optional Input Elements detailed in Table 2-64.  A suggested clarification to the Altitude Type Selection, Element #5 in Table 2-64 is to modify §2.2.4.5.2.2, third paragraph, second sentence by replacing the first five words as follows: "A means shall be provided  If an Altitude Type Selection Input is available, it shall be used ..."

    2.2.4.5.2.4 2/9/04 As a result of the need to ensure that a transmitting system passes through the received NIC and NAC, it was decided during Meeting #20 of Working Group 5 that there would be no extrapolation of NIC or NAC.

    Proposed Resolution: Add the following sentence on to the end of the existing requirement in this section: “The value of the NIC parameter shall be the highest value in  Table 2-15 consistent with the NIC Input with the exception that if the NIC Input is consistent with a value of “9,” “10” or “11” and the ADS-B equipment does not support the timing requirements for the Precision condition (§2.2.7.2.2), a NIC value of “8” shall be transmitted.”

    2.2.4.5.2.5.1
    including
    Table 2-17
    through
    2.2.4.5.2.5.2
    including
    Table 2-18
    11/6/03

    As initiated by the review of the UAT SARPS Technical Manual, and as documented in Issue Paper 71, the errors in the determination and validation of the Air/Ground State were originally defined in DO-260 and were carried forward to the ADS-B MASPS (DO-242A), the UAT MOPS (DO-282), and the revised 1090 MHz ES MOPS (DO-260A).  The RTCA SC-186 Plenary on 9/18/03 established an ad hoc working group to resolve the errors and to recommend language for the draft ASA MASPS (DO-289).  Working Paper UAT-WP-17-03 details the text agreed to by that ad hoc working group, and which was additionally reviewed and agreed to by the Technical Subgroup of the ICAO ACP WG-B SCRSP for inclusion in the revision of the 1090 SARPS. 

     Proposed Resolution: It was recommended that the text of UAT WP-17-03, as included in the ASA MASPS (DO-289), be adopted to replace the text and tables of these referenced paragraphs in DO-282

    2.2.4.5.2.6.2 12/8/03 As documented in Working Paper UAT-WP-18-01, in some cases, the UAT MOPS text includes phrases such as "if available" to describe the appropriate processing of Optional Input Elements detailed in Table 2-64.  A suggested clarification to the Ground Speed Element #12 in Table 2-64 is to modify the first sentence of §2.2.4.5.2.6.2 by changing the end of the sentence by inserting the phrase “if Ground Speed is available.”
    2.2.4.5.2.6.4 12/8/03 As documented in Working Paper UAT-WP-18-01, in some cases, the UAT MOPS text includes phrases such as "if available" to describe the appropriate processing of Optional Input Elements detailed in Table 2-64.  A suggested clarification to the Track Angle Element #13 in Table 2-64 is to modify the end of the first sentence of §2.2.4.5.2.6.4 as follows: "if not available otherwise Track Angle shall be encoded, if available."
    2.2.4.5.2.7.1.1 12/8/03 As documented in Working Paper UAT-WP-18-01, in some cases, the UAT MOPS text includes phrases such as "if available" to describe the appropriate processing of Optional Input Elements detailed in Table 2-64.  A suggested clarification to the Geometric Vertical Rate, Element #16 in Table 2-64, is to insert the words “if available” after “Geometric source” in the second paragraph of §2.2.4.5.2.7.1.1.
    2.2.4.5.2.7.2
    Table 2-35
    8/6/03
    and
    12/8/03
    Working Paper UAT-WP-15-03 describes the request to simplify the “Length” and “Width” Category columns by eliminating the left side of all of the inequalities. 

    Working Paper UAT-WP-18-03 further describes a change to Codes 14 and 15 as per agreement in the ASA MASPS (RTCA DO-289).

    2.2.4.5.3
    Table 2-38
    8/6/03 During the review of the proposed UAT SARPS Technical Manual, it was requested that a “Note” be added after Table 2-38, reading: “Design of the TIS-B Ground Subsystem is in a preliminary phase.  The message structure in Table 2-38 may evolve as this design matures.
    2.2.4.5.3.1 8/6/03 During the review of the proposed UAT SARPS Technical Manual, it was requested that the “Notes” in this section be revised to be clearer.  The proposed Notes would read: “1. The “UTC” field shown in Table 2-11 for the State Vector Element is not provided for TIS-B transmissions.  The “UTC Coupled” status of the ground station transmitting TIS-B information is available in the UAT Ground Uplink Message (§2.2.3.2.2.1.4)” and 2. The application that uses TIS-B reports is assumed to make appropriate checks for a TIS-B Site ID of value ZERO.  If the Address Qualifier shown in Table 2-10 indicates that this is a TIS-B Message, and the TIS-B SITE ID indicates a value of ZERO, an error condition is indicated.”
    2.2.4.5.4.2 4/7/04 Use of "must" in reference to the Call Sign characters is confusing, since it implies that the UAT equipment performs some action.  UAT equipment does not validate the data it is provided, and the Call Sign that is provided to the UAT is only re-formatted into Radix-40 format.  Also, use of the term "left-most" is non-descriptive without specifying the context.

    Proposed Resolution: Re-write the 1st paragraph as follows:

    The Call Sign field consists of eight characters.  Each character shall be represented as Base-40 code values as shown in Table 2-41.  The left-most character (as depicted on a cockpit display unit) corresponds to Character #1.

    Add the following Note:

    Note: The formatting of the Call Sign field is outside the scope of this document.  It is expected that the 'space' character will only be used as trailing pad characters.  Any characters that are not provided to the UAT equipment may be encoded as either the "not available" code, or the "space" character.
    2.2.4.5.4.5
    Table 2-43
    9/17/03

    The UAT MOPS at present contains no requirements on use of the MOPS Version Number field by an ADS-B receiver.  The only requirement is that it be transmitted, and that it be the value ONE.  At a minimum, some guidance on how to use the Version Number would be appropriate.  Proposed Resolution: Add Note 2 below Table 2-43 stating:

    Note: “It is assumed that future changes to the UAT MOPS will be backward-compatible with previous versions.  Given this, the function of the UAT MOPS Version Number is to support forward compatibility with future revisions of these MOPS.  For example, future MOPS Version UAT equipment may safely assume that it may ignore any "reserved" data fields in received messages from the earlier versions of these MOPS.  Also, future MOPS Version equipment should ignore the content of all reserved fields shown in the original RTCA DO-282, until the receiving equipment obtains a participant's MOPS Version number.  Fields that are defined in a earlier version of these MOPS may be relied upon to remain consistent with later MOPS versions.
    2.2.4.5.4.9 2/9/04 As a result of the need to ensure that a transmitting system passes through the received NIC and NAC, it was decided during Meeting #20 of Working Group 5 that there would be no extrapolation of NIC or NAC.

    Proposed Resolution: Add the following sentence on to the end of the existing requirement in this section: “The value of the NACP parameter shall be the highest value in Table 2-45 consistent with the NACP Input with the exception that if the NACP Input is consistent with a value of “10” or “11” and the ADS-B equipment does not support the timing requirements for the Precision condition (§2.2.7.2.2), a NACP value of “9” shall be transmitted.”

    2.2.4.5.4.12.2 8/6/03 As per discussion in Working Paper UAT-WP-15-04, there appears to have been an inconsistency between the TCAS equipment interface requirements in the ADS-B MASPS and the UAT MOPS.  This analysis is supported by discussion of the UAT SARPS Subgroup and the proposed changes are consistent with changes made to the UAT SARPS Technical Manual.  Following the suggested changes in UAT-WP-15-04, the sentence in the ADS-B MASPS §3.4.4.9.1, which contains the requirement R3.102-B, will be inserted prior to the last sentence in the first paragraph of §2.2.4.5.4.12.2.  Additionally, in the second existing paragraph, the last word will be changed from “ZERO” to “ONE.”  Finally, the “Note 1” from the ADS-B MASPS §3.4.4.9.1 will be inserted after the second paragraph.
    2.2.4.5.4.13.1 8/6/03 As per discussion in Working Paper UAT-WP-15-04, there appears to have been an inconsistency between the TCAS equipment interface requirements in the ADS-B MASPS and the UAT MOPS.  This analysis is supported by discussion of the UAT SARPS Subgroup and the proposed changes are consistent with changes made to the UAT SARPS Technical Manual.  Following the suggested changes in UAT-WP-15-04, the sentence in the ADS-B MASPS §3.4.4.10.1, which contains the requirement R3.110-B, will be inserted prior to the last sentence in the first paragraph of §2.2.4.5.4.13.1.  Additionally, in the second existing paragraph, the last word will be changed from “ZERO” to “ONE.”
    2.2.4.5.4.14 12/8/03 As documented in Working Paper UAT-WP-18-01, confusion over the scope of this True/Magnetic Flag is easy to achieve, since it exists in the Mode Status Element, but refers to fields in the Target State Element in a different transmitted message.  Proposed Resolution: Change the title of §2.2.4.5.4.14 to “True/Magnetic Indicator Flag for the Target State Element” and alter the text of paragraph one to clarify the use of this ‘Indicator’ in support of the Target State Element.
    2.2.4.5.6.1
    Table 2-52
    12/8/03 As documented in Working Paper UAT-WP-18-01, the use of “Track Heading” is incorrect inside Table 2-52, and should be changed to “Target Heading.”
    2.2.5.1 8/6/03 During the review of the proposed UAT SARPS Technical Manual, it was requested by the UAT SARPS Subgroup that the second sentence of the “Note” in this section be re-written as: “Short term GNSS outages are mitigated by UAT ground infrastructure providing timing information and/or by the ability of UAT avionics to prevent Airborne UAT Transmitting Subsystems from transmitting in the Ground Uplink Segment for a minimum of 20 minutes in the absence of GNSS (§2.2.5.2 [d]).”
    2.2.6.1.2 8/6/03 In Note 2 under Table 2-63, second line change “Trajectory State” to “Target State”
    2.2.6.2.1 2/9/04

    Working Paper UAT-WP-20-03 identifies a problem with the test procedure Table 2-97 and indicates that the problem is a need for a clarification to the requirement in §2.2.6.2.1.

    Proposed Resolution: As identified in Working Paper UAT-WP-20-03, in the second paragraph of §2.2.6.2.1, which defines the transmission timing for the current UAT frame m,  in front of the existing equation for R(m), place the phrase “When m>=1,” and in front of the equation for R(0), place the phrase “When m=0,”
    2.2.6.2.2 12/8/03 Clarification is required as to whether the “1 second UTC epoch,” referenced in the 3rd line of the first paragraph, is specified as the reference point for Tx MSO timing, is the Time Mark signal presented to the equipment, as specified in §2.2.5 and Figure 2-6, page 64.  Using the Time Mark signal as presented to the equipment would remove any implied requirement for the UAT equipment to compensate for errors in an externally supplied 1PPS time mark signal.  Proposed Resolution: Insert the phrase “as supplied to the UAT Transmitting Subsystem” in the third line of the first paragraph after the words ‘UTC epoch.’
    2.2.7.1.b 12/8/03 As documented in Working Paper UAT-WP-18-01, §2.2.7.1 provides the requirements text for Table 2-64.  Subparagraph "b" describes how the "Optional" input elements are handled.  As written, the text is most applicable to Data Elements that have a corresponding Field in the transmitted message payload.  The text of "b" does not provide sufficient guidance for Input Elements that are used by the UAT Transmitting Subsystem, but do not necessarily map one-for-one into a transmitted Field.

    Proposed Resolution: Change the period ending the sentence of subparagraph "b" into a comma and to the end add the phrase: "or be processed using the 'data unavailable' procedures related to that element."

    2.2.7.1
    Table 2-64
    (1) 8/6/03

    (2) 12/8/03

    (1) Element #13 (Track Angle) is listed as Mandatory for Class A1L.  The requirement in §2.2.4.5.2.6 is that while in the GROUND state, the State Vector data includes Ground Speed and either Heading or Track Angle.  It makes little sense for Ground Speed and Heading interfaces to be Optional, but a Track Angle interface to be Mandatory, as shown in Table 2-64.  Proposed Resolution: Mark the Track Angle interface as Optional for A1L.

    (2) As documented in Working Paper UAT-WP-18-01, the existing text of §2.2.4.5.2.7.2 does not define any “data unavailable” condition for the Aircraft/Vehicle Length and Width Code, and the Position Offset Applied fields.  This is consistent with Table 2-64 showing a “n/a” in the Data Lifetime column, since this is a static data for a given A/V.  However, these Input Data Elements are designated as Optional for the A0 and A1L equipment classes.  Though the ADS-B MASPS (DO-242A §3.4.4.6) allows certain participants (Length < 25 meters and Width <= 34 meters) to not transmit the A/V Length and Width Code, the UAT MOPS as written makes no provision for not sending these codes.  In addition, the UAT MOPS does not provide any guidance for the use of these codes in the case where these inputs are Optional and not provided.  Proposed Resolution: Modify Table 2-64 to make A/V Length, Width and POA Fields Mandatory for all aircraft equipment classes.

    2.2.7.2.2 1/12/04

    Subparagraph ‘a’ requires the Time of Applicability of the ALTITUDE field, when in the Precision condition, to be the current 0.2 second epoch.  However, many aircraft do not have encoding pressure altimeters that output at a 5 Hz rate.  Since current encoding pressure altimeters do not provide Time of Applicability, the practical effect of this requirement might be to preclude the implementation of the Precision condition completely.  This would largely dilute the benefits for surface operations available from use of WAAS-enabled GPS.  This problem is further discussed in Working Paper UAT-WP-19-11.

    Proposed Resolution:  Revise subparagraph ‘a’ by inserting the phrase “when it conveys a Geometric Altitude” after reference to the “ALTITUDE” field.  Revise subparagraph ‘b’ by deleting the reference to the LATITUDE, LONGITUDE and ALTITUDE fields, and simply state that “All other ADS-B Message fields that are provided at the ADS-B equipment …”
    2.2.7.2.3 (1) 2/9/04

    (2) 4/7/04

    (1) As a result of the need to ensure that a transmitting system passes through the received NIC and NAC, it was decided during Meeting #20 of Working Group 3 that there would be no extrapolation of NIC or NAC when the system is in the “Non-UTC Coupled” condition.

    Proposed Resolution: (1) Delete subparagraph “b,” and combine subparagraph “a” with the entry sentence. (2) Modify the first sentence of the Note to read: “A UAT Transmitting Subsystem that is capable of meeting the timing requirements of §2.2.7.2.2 makes no adjustment to the NIC or NAC that it receives as inputs.”

    (2) During a review of the proposed change to this section by the ICAO ACP WG-C UAT Subgroup, it was agreed that first sentence of the Note should not be deleted, but rather should be changed to be clarified.

    Proposed Resolution: Modify the first sentence of the Note to read: “A UAT Transmitting Subsystem that is capable of meeting the timing requirements of §2.2.7.2.2 makes no adjustment to the NIC or NAC that it receives as inputs.”
    2.2.8.2.1.1 (1) 8/6/03

    (2) 2/9/04

    (1) In the title, change “is Desired” to “As Desired"

    (2) In §2.2.8.2.1.1, as identified in Working Paper UAT-WP-20-05A, the receiver sensitivity requirement is specified under three simultaneous worst-case conditions of signal degradation.  This triple-worst-case specification is an unnecessarily tight constraint, since only a statistically small number of participants will operate on all three margins simultaneously.
    Proposed Resolution: (a) In the first paragraph, delete the word “simultaneous.”  (b) Replace both subparagraphs with relaxed text.

    2.2.8.2.1.2-1 8/6/03 In the title, change “is Desired” to “As Desired”
    2.2.8.2.1.2-2 (1) 8/6/03

    (2) 2/9/04

    (1) To conform to a proposed addition to the UAT SARPS Technical Manual, insert a new paragraph entitled “Basic UAT ADS-B Message As Desired Signal.”  Copy the existing text of §2.2.8.2.1.1 for “long” and change the desired signal level to “-94dBm.”

    (2) In §2.2.8.2.1.2, as identified in Working Paper UAT-WP-20-05A, the receiver sensitivity requirement is specified under three simultaneous worst-case conditions of signal degradation.  This triple-worst-case specification is an unnecessarily tight constraint, since only a statistically small number of participants will operate on all three margins simultaneously.
    Proposed Resolution: (a) In the first paragraph, delete the word “simultaneous.”  (b) Replace both subparagraphs with relaxed text.

    2.2.8.2.1.3 (new) (1) 8/6/03

    (2) 2/9/04

    (1) The existing §2.2.8.2.1.2 will be renumbered to §2.2.8.2.1.3.  However, in the published §2.2.8.2.1.2, in order to have consistency with the ICAO VDL documentation, it is proposed that subparagraph (a) be changed from a value of 600 knots to a value of 850 knots, and that a Note be added under (a) stating that:

    Note: The 850 knot ground station closure rate is derived from a 600 knot true air speed, added to a 250 knot worst-case wind velocity.  The 1200 knot air-to-air closure remains valid because both aircraft are assumed to be within the same air mass, so the wind velocity makes no difference to the closure rate.

    (2) In the new §2.2.8.2.1.3, as identified in Working Paper UAT-WP-20-05A, the receiver sensitivity requirement is specified under three simultaneous worst-case conditions of signal degradation.  This triple-worst-case specification is an unnecessarily tight constraint, since only a statistically small number of participants will operate on all three margins simultaneously.  Proposed Resolution: (a) In the first paragraph, delete the word “simultaneous.”  (b) Replace both subparagraphs with relaxed text.

    2.2.8.2.2 2/9/04

    As identified in Working Paper UAT-WP-20-05A, there is a need to clarify that the stated dynamic range requirement applies to reception of Long ADS-B Messages only.

    Proposed Resolution:  Insert the words “for Long ADS-B Messages” after the word “rate” in the first line of the initial paragraph.
    2.2.8.2.3 2/9/04 As identified in Working Paper UAT-WP-20-05A, there is a need to clarify that the desired signal for this requirement is the Long ADS-B Message.  Additionally, it is necessary to reduce the minimum rejection ratio for the +1.0 MHz case in Table 2-65 by 3 dB (from 18 dB to 15 dB).
    2.2.8.2.7 11/6/03

    The requirements for processing ADS-B sync Trigger events do not provide a minimum requirement for the time interval between overlapping message events. (i.e. gives no guidance on the rate of overlapping messages).  This implies that all successful messages may be overlapping messages.  The test procedure (§2.4.8.3.3, page 252) presents without justification that 100 overlapping messages per second is sufficient to validate this requirement.

    Proposed Resolution: Working Paper UAT-WP-16-02 raised the issue of whether or not there should be an addition to the UAT MOPS to cover minimum requirements for processing synchronization trigger events at a high rate.  Working Paper UAT-WP-17-02 recommended that a new requirement be added at §2.2.8.2.7and that a new test procedure be added at §2.4.8.2.7.
    2.2.8.3.1.1 2/9/04 The requirement of subparagraph “a” indicates that if the Reed Solomon decoder determines that there are no residual errors after completing the decoding process “AND any of the first 5 bits of the payload has a non-zero value,” then a Successful Message Reception shall be declared.  During Meeting 20 of WG-5, it was agreed that the requirement requiring any of the first five bits to be non-zero was not a valid requirement.

    Proposed Resolution: Remove the text of the requirement in subparagraph “a” that is shown above as underlined and bold.  Add a note explaining this as note #2 in the set of notes at the end of these requirements.

    2.2.8.3.5 12/8/03 During the review of the UAT SARPS Technical Manual, it was agreed by the UAT SARPS Subgroup that in writing this requirement, we forgot about the reference point for the measurement.  Therefore, to conform to a proposed change to this requirement in the UAT SARPS Technical Manual, it is proposed to revise subparagraph (c) to read: “Accuracy of +/- 500 nanoseconds relative to the optimum sample point of the first bit of the synchronization sequence applied at the receiver terminals for UAT equipment using either an internal or external UTC Coupled time source.
    2.2.12 (1) 12/8/03

    (2) 1/12/04

    (3) 4/7/04

    (1) During the review of the UAT SARPS Technical Manual, it was agreed by the UAT SARPS Subgroup that the title of this requirement in the Tech Manual would be changed to “Mutual Suppression Pulses,” and that the text of this section will be changed to be:

    a.      UAT equipment shall provide an output suitable for sending suppression signals.

    b.      UAT equipment shall not respond to suppression signals.

    Note: UAT equipment is not to inhibit or delay its transmissions based on suppression signals.  There is no need to desensitize the UAT receiver based on suppression signals.

    (2) As documented in Working Paper UAT-WP-19-04, it becomes necessary to provide a boundary around the suppression pulse.  Proposed Resolution: Add the following on to the end of subparagraph 'a:'  "The suppression duration shall begin no later than the start of the ADS-B Message Transmission Interval defined in §2.2.2.5 and no earlier than 2 microseconds prior to the start of the ADS-B Message Transmission Interval.  The suppression duration shall end 10 +/- 1 microseconds from the end of the ADS-B Message Transmission Interval."

    (3) After further Working Group discussion, it was agreed that the first paragraph should be revised and replaced in its entirety, as follows:

    UAT equipment shall provide an output signal suitable for sending suppression signals. The UAT equipment shall provide a mutual suppression signal whenever the transmitter output power exceeds -20 dBm.  In addition, the suppression signal shall not become active prior to 5 microseconds before the start of the ADS-B Message Transmission Interval defined in §2.2.2.5, and the suppression signal shall not remain active later than 5 microseconds after the end of the ADS-B Message Transmission Interval defined in §2.2.2.5.”
    2.2.14.3 1/12/04 An option to use a frequency diplexer is provided to allow sharing of a single antenna on an aircraft between the ATCRBS/Mode S Transponder and the UAT Subsystem.  New requirements are provided in 2.2.14.3, with the appropriate test procedures provided in 2.4.14.3 and further supporting information in Appendix E.
    2.2.15.2.1.3 1/12/04

    The existing text of this section appears to be a cut-and-paste from §2.2.15.1.1.3, and it appears that it was not completely edited for content, because it still includes references to “data input interfaces” that are required for the report assembly function, and that does not make a lot of sense.

    Proposed Resolution: Replace the text of this section with the following:
    ”The ADS-B Receiving Subsystem input processing function shall be capable of efficiently processing all necessary interfaces as required for Receiver Message Processing and Report Assembly, as defined in §2.2.8.3, §2.2.9 and §2.2.10.”
    2.3.1
    Table 2-70
    8/6/03 To conform to a proposed addition to the UAT SARPS Technical Manual, it is proposed that we add a new paragraph §2.3.2.12 entitled “Basic UAT ADS-B Message As Desired Signal.”  Indicate appropriate tests for the new §2.3.2.12.  Increase all of the following paragraph numbers in the 2.3.2.13 through 20 range.
    2.3.2.11 8/6/03 In the title, change “is Desired” to “As Desired”
    2.3.2.12-1 8/6/03 In the title, change “is Desired” to “As Desired”
    2.3.2.12-2 8/6/03 To conform to a proposed addition to the UAT SARPS Technical Manual, it is proposed that we add a new paragraph entitled “Basic UAT ADS-B Message As Desired Signal.”  Reference the correct test procedure paragraph.
    2.4.2.1 12/8/03 Working Paper UAT-WP-15-13 raises concerns about using the root raised cosine filter when setting up the Vector Signal Analyzer for this test procedure.  Further investigation will be performed by various individuals and reported on during the 17 September 2003 WG Meeting #16 so that a conclusion may be reached on what change, if any, to apply here.  Proposed Resolution: For the measurement filter selection, replace "root raised cosine" with "low pass".
    2.4.2.4 (1) 8/6/03

    (2) 12/8/03
    (1) Pursuant to the acceptance of the change suggested in Working Paper UAT-WP-15-01 for §2.2.2.4, update the Purpose/Introduction with the new text from the requirement change in §2.2.2.4.

    (2) Update Figure 2-10 and Figure 2-11 because of the change in filter from “root raised cosine” to “low pass.”   See Working Paper UAT-WP-19-07

    (3) Write new test procedure (Step 3) to accommodate the new requirement for the horizontal eye opening.   See Working Paper UAT-WP-19-07

    2.4.2.5 4/7/04 During implementation of an operational UAT transmitter, it has become evident that the “20 dB” corner in the upper curve of Figure 2-1 during the ramp up and ramp down periods is needlessly restrictive.  Relief of this restrictive requirement is being requested.

    Proposed Resolution: It was agreed by WG-5 during Meeting 21 that the 4 by 4 bit periods in Figure 2-1, which identify the ramp up and ramp down periods, would be changed to 2 by 6 bit periods during the ramp up, and 6 by 2 bit periods during the ramp down.  Corresponding changes will be made in the text of the requirement and in the test procedures.

    2.4.3.2.2.2 9/17/03 Working Paper UAT-WP-15-08 proposed a format for Information Frames that would contain the incremental units of information conveyed in the UAT Ground Uplink Message.  This framework of Information Frames offers the flexibility to support various kinds of uplink information as well as a mixture of information types within each Ground Uplink Message.  WG-5 agreed during Meeting #16 with the recommendations of UAT-WP-15-08 and directed that the additions proposed in the Working Paper be made in §2.2.3.2.2 and §2.2.3.2.2.2, as appropriate.  There are no additional test procedures required because of this implementation.
    2.4.4.5.1.3.2 4/7/04 Need to conform the test procedure to be consistent with the proposed revision to the original requirement, and to add a step in the test procedure to test that the ADDRESS QUALIFIER can only be set to ONE (indicating the use of a self-assigned, temporary address) if the participant is NOT receiving ATC services.

    Proposed Resolutions: (1) Replace the first paragraph of the “Purpose/Introduction with the following: “An “ADDRESS QUALIFIER” value of ONE (binary 001) shall indicate that the message is an ADS-B Message from an aircraft that is not receiving ATC services, and that the “ADDRESS” field holds the transmitting aircraft’s self-assigned ownship temporary address.  An “ADDRESS QUALIFIER” value of ONE shall not be used when the “Receiving ATC Services Flag” (§2.2.4.5.4.13.3) is set to ONE, indicating that the Participant is receiving ATC services.”

    (2) Add a new “Step 4” to the test procedure as follows: “Via the appropriate interface, set the “Receiving ATC Services Flag (§2.2.4.5.4.13.3) to ONE (1) and set the Address Selection to Temporary.  Verify that the resultant ADDRESS QUALIFIER value is still set to ZERO (binary 000).
    2.4.4.5.2.2 12/8/03

    ALTITUDE TYPE Test Procedure: Steps 1, 3, and 4 say to provide "valid non-zero altitude information".  The term "non-zero" is redundant, since sea-level is a perfectly valid altitude.  Proposed Resolution: Delete the phrase "non-zero" from the text of Steps 1, 3, and 4.

    The 2nd sentence of Step 1 says to verify the test procedures for Message Types, but none of the remaining test procedure steps make any mention of Message Types (since the Altitude field is included in the basic State Vector which is common to all messages).  Proposed Resolution: Delete the 2nd sentence of Step 1.

    In the title of Step 3, change the phrase "in Failure Mode" to "not available".

    In Step 3, 5th paragraph, end of the first sentence, add the phrase "and resume the input of Barometric Pressure Altitude."

    The second paragraph of §2.2.4.5.2.2 details the ‘data lifetime’ requirement for the Altitude Type Selection Input, but there is no specific test procedure for this requirement.  Proposed Resolution: Add a test procedure step for the test of data lifetime for the Altitude Type Selection Input.
    2.4.4.5.2.4 (1) 2/9/04

    (2) 4/7/04

    As a result of the need to ensure that a transmitting system passes through the received NIC and NAC, it was decided during Meeting #20 of Working Group 3 that there would be no extrapolation of NIC or NAC.

    Proposed Resolutions: (1) In the "Purpose/Introduction" add the following sentence on to the end of the existing requirement in this section: “The value of the NIC parameter shall be the highest value in  Table 2-15 consistent with the NIC Input with the exception that if the NIC Input is consistent with a value of “9,” “10” or “11” and the ADS-B equipment does not support the timing requirements for the Precision condition (§2.2.7.2.2), a NIC value of “8” shall be transmitted.”

    (2) Add the following text on to the end of Step 2 in this test procedure: If the ADS-B equipment does not support the timing requirements for the precision condition (§2.2.7.2.2), then verify that the NIC subfield in the transmitted UAT Messages is equal to “8,” when the test cases are being run with RC and VPL data that is provided to the ADS-B Transmitting Subsystem that is consistent with NIC values of “9,” “10” or “11.”

    2.4.4.5.2.5.1
    Table 2-82
    2.4.4.5.2.5.2
    Table 2-83
    1/12/04 These test procedures have been checked and revised to correspond to the requirements text outlined in Working Paper UAT-WP-17-03, which describes the resolution to the air/ground determination and validation agreed to by RTCA, the FAA and ICAO groups.  The only changes to the test procedure are reflected in Table 2-82 and Table 2-83.   See UAT-WP-19-06
    2.4.4.5.4.3.1
    Table 2-91
    8/6/03 In the “Call Sign Character” column, in the row specific to the “Small – 15,500 to 75,000 lbs” Emitter Category, change the “Call Sign” value from “KG000000” to “MG000000”
    2.4.4.5.4.3.2
    Table 2-92
    8/6/03 Numerous corrections to the “Call Sign Characters” values associated with the Binary Encoding for Bytes 20 and 21.  No changes to any of the Binary Encoding values.
    2.4.4.5.4.3.3
    Table 2-93
    8/6/03 Numerous corrections to the “Call Sign Characters” values associated with the Binary Encoding for Bytes 22 and 23.  These changes are the same as applied to Table 2-92 Call Sign Characters.  No changes to any of the Binary Encoding values.
    2.4.4.5.4.9 (1) 2/9/04

    (2) 4/7/04

    As a result of the need to ensure that a transmitting system passes through the received NIC and NAC, it was decided during Meeting #20 of Working Group 3 that there would be no extrapolation of NIC or NAC.

    Proposed Resolution: (1) In the "Purpose/Introduction" add the following sentence on to the end of the existing requirement in this section: “The value of the NACP parameter shall be the highest value in Table 2-45 consistent with the NACP Input with the exception that if the NACP Input is consistent with a value of “10” or “11” and the ADS-B equipment does not support the timing requirements for the Precision condition (§2.2.7.2.2), a NACP value of “9” shall be transmitted.”

    (2) Add the following text on to the end of Step 2 in this test procedure: If the ADS-B equipment does not support the timing requirements for the precision condition (§2.2.7.2.2), then verify that the NACP subfield in the transmitted UAT Messages is equal to “9,” when the test cases are being run with NACP input data that is provided to the ADS-B Transmitting Subsystem that is consistent with the values of “10” or “11.”

    2.4.4.5.4.12.2 8/6/03 As per changes suggested in Working Paper UAT-WP-15-04, modify the Purpose/Introduction to be consistent with §2.2.4.5.4.12.2.  Add an additional Test Procedure step to test the new requirement being added in §2.2.4.5.4.12.2 and alter Step 3 to test for a condition of “ONE” instead of “ZERO.”
    2.4.4.5.4.13.1 8/6/03 As per changes suggested in Working Paper UAT-WP-15-04, modify the Purpose/Introduction to be consistent with §2.2.4.5.4.13.1.  Add an additional Test Procedure step to test the new requirement being added in §2.2.4.5.4.13.1 and alter Step 3 to test for a condition of “ONE” instead of “ZERO.”
    2.4.6.2.1 2/9/04

    Working Paper UAT-WP-20-03 identifies a problem with the test procedure Table 2-97 and indicates that the problem is a need for a clarification to the requirement in §2.2.6.2.1.

    Proposed Resolution: Make the changes to the “Purpose/Introduction” as identified in Working Paper UAT-WP-20-03 and in the changes identified for §2.2.6.2.1.  Also, replace Table 2-97 with that proposed in Working Paper UAT-WP-20-03.
    2.4.6.2.2 1/12/04 It was agreed to modify §2.2.6.2.2 by inserting the phrase “as supplied to the UAT Transmitting Subsystem” in the third line of the first paragraph after the words ‘UTC epoch.’  It therefore becomes necessary to change the test procedure in §2.4.6.2.2 to remove references to the absolute UTC timing.  Proposed Resolution:  In the “Equipment Required” section, and in Step 3, remove the reference to UTC time.  See Working Paper UAT-WP-19-12 for specific text of Step 3 and removal of Step 4.
    2.4.7.1
    Table 2-98
    8/6/03

    Element #13 (Track Angle) is listed as Mandatory for Class A1L.  The requirement in §2.2.4.5.2.6 is that while in the GROUND state, the State Vector data includes Ground Speed and either Heading or Track Angle.  It makes little sense for Ground Speed and Heading interfaces to be Optional, but a Track Angle interface to be Mandatory, as shown in Table 2-98.  Proposed Resolution: Mark the Track Angle interface as Optional for A1L.

    §2.4.7.2.1.1
    §2.4.7.2.1.2
    and
    §2.4.7.2.2.1
    §2.4.7.2.2.2
    1/12/04 Working Paper UAT-WP-19-11 identifies a problem in which the Time of Applicability of the ALTITUDE in the Precision condition if the ALTITUDE Field contains Pressure Altitude should be the 1.0 second epoch versus the 0.2 second UTC epoch.  The Working Group agreed on a proposal to modify §2.2.7.2.1 and §2.2.7.2.2, to reference Geometric Altitude to the Precision Condition.  Therefore the same text change was made in the “Purpose/Introduction” of each of these test procedures.  No actual change was made in any of the test procedure steps.
    2.4.7.2.3 2/9/04 As a result of the need to ensure that a transmitting system passes through the received NIC and NAC, it was decided during Meeting #20 of Working Group 3 that there would be no extrapolation of NIC or NAC when the system is in the “Non-UTC Coupled” condition.

    Proposed Resolution: (1) In the “Purpose/Introduction” delete subparagraph “b,” and combine subparagraph “a” with the entry sentence. (2) Modify the first sentence of the Note to read: “A UAT Transmitting Subsystem that is capable of meeting the timing requirements of §2.2.7.2.2 makes no adjustment to the NIC or NAC that it receives as inputs.”  (3) Delete Step #2 of the test procedure and renumber Step #3.

    2.4.8.2.1.1 (1) 8/6/03

    (2) 12/8/03

    (1) In the title, change “is Desired” to “As Desired”

    (2) There is an error in this test procedure whereby the center frequency should be deviated by the maximum tolerance plus the Doppler.  It appears to have just the Doppler on the value of 2 kHz.  Proposed Resolution: (a) The paragraph between the Note: and the Equipment Required: should end with: “… under conditions of maximum frequency offset, Doppler shift, and modulation distortion.  (b) Under the Equipment Required: the Center Frequency should be stated as 978 MHz +/- 2.0 kHz +/- 19.560 kHz  (c) The Center Frequency for Step 1 should be 978 MHz – 2.0 kHz – 19.56 kHz  (d) The Center Frequency for Step 3 should be 978 MHz + 2.0 kHz + 19.56 kHz

    2.4.8.2.1.2 (1) 8/6/03

    (2) 1/12/04

    (1) In the title, change “is Desired” to “As Desired”

    (2) To conform to a proposed addition to the UAT SARPS Technical Manual, it is proposed that we add a new paragraph §2.4.8.2.1.2 entitled “Verification of the Basic UAT ADS-B Message As A Desired Signal.”  A new Test Procedure was proposed by Tom Pagano for this new requirement in Working Paper UAT-WP-19-03 as a copy of the test procedure in 2.4.8.2.1.1 for the ‘Long’ Message, with appropriate changes in the signal level.

    2.4.8.2.1.3 (new) 8/6/03 The existing §2.4.8.2.1.2 will be renumbered to §2.4.8.2.1.3.  However, in the published §2.4.8.2.1.2, in order to have consistency with the ICAO VDL documentation, it is proposed that in the “Purpose/Introduction” subparagraph “(a)” there be a change from a value of 600 knots to a value of 850 knots.  Additional changes are required to the “Equipment Required” section and possibly to the “Measurement Procedures.”
    2.4.8.2.3 and
    Table 2-101
    2/9/04 As identified in Working Paper UAT-WP-20-05A, there is a need to clarify that the desired signal for this requirement is the Long ADS-B Message.  Additionally, it is necessary to reduce the minimum rejection ratio for the +1.0 MHz case in Table 2-65 by 3 dB (from 18 dB to 15 dB).  These changes require corresponding changes to Step 5 of these test procedures by replacing 99% with 90%, and by modifying the test signal level from –90+/-0.5dBm to –93.  All of the CW Interference Levels identified in Table 2-101 must be revised to be consistent with the change in Table 2-65.
    2.4.8.2.4 4/7/04 After review of test procedures because of the change to §2.2.8.2.3, it was discovered that the test procedures in §2.4.8.2.4 were testing at the receiver end of the cable, whereas the requirement was written referencing the antenna end of the cable.

    Proposed Resolution: Make appropriate changes to the values in this test procedure to align the values in the test procedure with the requirement.

    2.4.8.2.7 11/6/03

    The requirements for processing ADS-B sync Trigger events do not provide a minimum requirement for the time interval between overlapping message events. (i.e. gives no guidance on the rate of overlapping messages).  This implies that all successful messages may be overlapping messages.  The test procedure (§2.4.8.3.3, page 252) presents without justification that 100 overlapping messages per second is sufficient to validate this requirement.

    Proposed Resolution: Working Paper UAT-WP-16-02 raised the issue of whether or not there should be an addition to the UAT MOPS to cover minimum requirements for processing synchronization trigger events at a high rate.  Working Paper UAT-WP-17-02 recommended that a new requirement be added at §2.2.8.2.7and that a new test procedure be added at §2.4.8.2.7.
    2.4.8.3.1.2-1
    Table 2-105
    8/6/03 Row 2 of Table 2-105 has a font size larger than the other rows causing the columns not to line up with the other rows.
    2.4.8.3.1.2-2
    Table 2-108
    8/6/03 Row 6 of Table 108 has a font size larger than the other rows causing the columns not to line up with the other rows.
    2.4.8.3.3 1/12/04

    The requirements for processing ADS-B sync Trigger events do not provide a minimum requirement for the time interval between overlapping message events. (i.e. gives no guidance on the rate of overlapping messages).  This implies that all successful messages may be overlapping messages.  This test procedure presents without justification that 100 overlapping messages per second are sufficient to validate this requirement.

    Proposed Resolution: Working Paper UAT-WP-16-02 raised the issue of whether or not there should be an addition to the UAT MOPS to cover minimum requirements for processing synchronization trigger events at a high rate.  Working Paper UAT-WP-17-02 recommended that a new requirement be added at §2.2.8.2.7and that a new test procedure be added at §2.4.8.2.7.  The adoption of UAT-WP-17-02 and its test procedure allow for the simplification of the test procedure for verification of the requirements for receiver processing of ADS-B Synchronization triggers found in §2.2.8.3.3.  Since the rate of Sync Triggers is now a clearly defined and separate requirement, the existing test procedure in §2.4.8.3.3 can be simplified to only validate the Sync detection logic.  Working Paper UAT-WP-18-05 identifies changes to the test procedure in §2.4.8.3.3 and Working Paper UAT-WP-19-09 proposes further changes and enhancements to that same test procedure.
    2.4.8.3.5 12/8/03

    (1) During the review of the UAT SARPS Technical Manual, it was agreed by the UAT SARPS Subgroup that in writing this requirement, we forgot about the reference point for the measurement.  Therefore, to conform to a proposed change to this requirement in the UAT SARPS Technical Manual, it is proposed to revise subparagraph (c) to read: “Accuracy of
    +/- 500 nanoseconds relative to the optimum sample point of the first bit of the synchronization sequence applied at the receiver terminals for UAT equipment using either an internal or external UTC Coupled time source.

    (2) In both paragraphs of Step 1, add the phrase “applied at the receiver terminals” between the words “ sequence” and “arriving.”
    2.4.10.3 9/17/03 The existing test procedure in this section requires the use of an "external report interface," which is inconsistent with other requirements in DO-282, as described in Working Paper UAT-WP-15-09.  Suggestions are made in the Working Paper for modifying the “Measurement Procedure” text, and Steps 3 and 6.  Thos suggestions were agreed to by the Working Group during Meeting #16, 9/17/03.
    2.4.12 (1) 12/8/03

    (2) 1/12/04

    (3) 4/7/04

    (1) During the review of the UAT SARPS Technical Manual, it was agreed by the UAT SARPS Subgroup that the title of this requirement in the Tech Manual would be changed to “Mutual Suppression Pulses,” and that the text of this section will be changed to be:

    a.      UAT equipment shall provide an output suitable for sending suppression signals.

    b.      UAT equipment shall not respond to suppression signals.

    Note: UAT equipment is not to inhibit or delay its transmissions based on suppression signals.  There is no need to desensitize the UAT receiver based on suppression signals.

    (2) As documented in Working Paper UAT-WP-19-04, it becomes necessary to provide a boundary around the suppression pulse.  Proposed Resolution: Add the following on to the end of subparagraph 'a:'  "The suppression duration shall begin no later than the start of the ADS-B Message Transmission Interval defined in §2.2.2.5 and no earlier than 2 microseconds prior to the start of the ADS-B Message Transmission Interval.  The suppression duration shall end 10 +/- 1 microseconds from the end of the ADS-B Message Transmission Interval."

    (3) After further Working Group discussion, it was agreed that the first paragraph should be revised and replaced in its entirety, as follows:

    UAT equipment shall provide an output signal suitable for sending suppression signals. The UAT equipment shall provide a mutual suppression signal whenever the transmitter output power exceeds -20 dBm.  In addition, the suppression signal shall not become active prior to 5 microseconds before the start of the ADS-B Message Transmission Interval defined in §2.2.2.5, and the suppression signal shall not remain active later than 5 microseconds after the end of the ADS-B Message Transmission Interval defined in §2.2.2.5.”

    It was also agreed during Meeting 21 that the test procedure would be written as follows:

    Equipment: 

    Provide an Oscilloscope,  an RF detector that provides a trigger output when the input level exceeds -20 dBm, and a load for the suppression output signal that is characteristic of the intended application.

    Measurement Procedure:

    Step 1:  Configure the UAT equipment to transmit Basic ADS-B messages.  Connect the suppression output signal to the load.  Connect the oscilloscope to the RF detector (trigger input) and the suppression signal (scope channel A)

    Step 2:  Verify that the rising and falling edges of the suppression output signal occur within 5 microseconds of the RF detector trigger points.

    Step 3:  Configure the UAT equipment to transmit Long ADS-B messages. 

    Step 4:  Verify that the rising and falling edges of the suppression output signal occur within 5 microseconds of the RF detector trigger points.

    Additionally add section 3.2.2 entitled "Mutual Suppression Bus" to test installed equipment performance.

    Appendix C
    Table C-1
    12/8/03 - Payload Type Code is shown as 4 bits, but it should be 5 (i.e., '0 0000')

    - Address Qualifier is shown as 4 bits, but should be 3 (i.e., '000')

    Appendix C
    Table C-2
    12/8/03 - Payload Type Code "Value" column should be '1' instead of '0'. and should be represented as '0 0000.'  As published, the example represents Payload Type Code 2.

    - Address Qualifier is shown as 4 bits, but should be 3 (i.e., '000')

    - The Data Field label "Participant Category Code" should read "Emitter Category."

    - For completeness, the description of the Emitter Category should indicate that the "Small" category is represented by the character code '2.'

    - The phrase "Flight ID" should be replaced by "Call Sign."

    - The character string AB should be represented in quotes, indicating that these characters are members of the radix-40 character set.  Similarly, the character strings CD1 and 234 should be represented in quotes as well.

    Appendix C
    Page C-7 example
    12/8/03 Because of the Payload Type Code change in Table C-2, the FEC Parity Bits for the example on Page C-7 is incorrect and will be revised.
    Appendix D 12/8/03 There are several incorrect references in the paragraph just prior to Figure D-7 because Appendix K was reorganized late in the publication process and references to Appendix K inside Appendix D were not corrected.  Proposed Resolution: In the 7th line of the paragraph, prior to Figure D-7,change "K.3.3.2 and K.3.4" to "K.4.1 and K.4.2."  Additionally, delete the last sentence of this paragraph because it incorrectly references a section "D.3.1.2" that does not exist.
    Appendix H 12/8/03

    In the last sentence of the paragraph under Figure H-2, it is stated that: “Note that prior to the synchronization sequence (i.e., during ramp up), the waveform is assumed to be modulated with zeroes as specified in the MOPS.”  However, the MOPS contains no such requirement during the ramp-up period.

    Proposed Resolution: In the interest of clarity, I suggest that we replace the referenced sentence with the following: “Note that prior to the synchronization sequence (i.e., during ramp up), the waveform is assumed to be modulated with zeroes.  Although the MOPS do not specify the type of modulation to be applied prior to the synchronization sequence, an input of some kind is required by the Nyquist filter, and the all zero bit pattern is shown as a representative example.”

                               WG 5 Home 


    For more information on the activities of this Working Group please contact the Working Group Secretary, Gary Furr at:

    email: Gary.CTR.Furr@faa.gov
    phone: (609) 485-4254

    continuation of blue navbar background
    Questions about this page? Accessibility Privacy Policy

    Federal Aviation Administration
    800 Independence Avenue,
    S.W. Washington, DC 20591

    Page Last Updated: March 18, 2003