Conformity Assessment Task Force Meeting - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 100
About This Presentation
Title:

Conformity Assessment Task Force Meeting

Description:

Description of the certification and approval processes applicable to products ... environments (i.e. EASA CS and AMC/GM and SES CS) should have the same status ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:103
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 101
Provided by: mgo8
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Conformity Assessment Task Force Meeting


1
Conformity Assessment Task ForceMeeting 13
EUROCONTROL Headquarters POLLUX Meeting Room 26
June 2008
2
Agenda Item 1
Opening Approval of Agenda
3
Agenda Item 2
Progress Report on EASA SES Frameworks
Comparison Study Philippe Crebassa Egis Avia
4
  • Conformity Assessment Task Force
  • 13th Meeting
  • Description Comparison of airworthiness and
    verification processes in EASA SES contexts
  • Progress Report
  • 26 June 2008
  • Presented by Philippe Crebassa

5
Content
  • Background
  • Organisation
  • Progress Report
  • Proposed measures

6
BACKGROUND
  • Emergence of
  • Interoperability conformity assessment processes
  • Safety assessment of ATM changes
  • Significant modification in practices for the
    management of CNS/ATM systems
  • EASA regulations
  • Airworthiness certification of products, parts
    and appliances
  • Operational approval for on-board equipment
    related to ATM programmes.
  • EASA and SES specific conformity processes wrt
    applicable regulations.
  • Juxtaposition of EASA and SES environments for
    A/G CNS/ATM
  • A complex regulatory environment with intertwined
    technical requirements, obligations of operators,
    ANSPs, and responsibility of authorities
  • Objectives of the study
  • To provide recommendations so as to increase the
    homogeneity and complementarities of EASA and SES
    conformity processes.
  • Not to reshape both environments to get a unique
    model for EASA and SES regulations.

7
ORGANISATION
  • Regulatory Unit, The European Commission, the
    EASA, Safety Regulatory Unit
  • 2 Steps
  • 3 assessments
  • Comparison of airworthiness certification and
    verification of conformity deliverable D1
  • Description of the certification and approval
    processes applicable to products supporting data
    link services deliverable D2
  • Comparison of the processes for the safety
    acceptance and conformity assessment of EATMN
    systems deliverable D3
  • Identification of recommendations for improvement
    and associated measures deliverable D4

8
PROGRESS REPORT
  • D1 final version delivered and accepted
  • D2, D3 draft final versions submitted for
    review
  • D4 initial draft presented to the last SG
  • End of Study expected in September 08

9
PROPOSED MEASURES
10
METHODOLOGY
11
Four classes
  • Rulemaking and standardisation
  • Terminology, structure, development and
    management of regulatory materials
  • Implementation of regulations and specifications
    before the operation phase
  • Certification, conformity assessment and safety
    acceptance before the entry into service /
    putting into service.
  • Monitoring of compliance during the operations
  • Verification of compliance during the operation
    phase.
  • SES Interoperability of non EU aircraft
  • Aircraft designed or registered outside the EU
    and entering the EATMN airspace.

12
Rulemaking and Standardisation
13
Measure 1 Common terminology
  • A common core terminology reference
  • The most important terms used in both systems
    have one single definition
  • Deviations from the reference
  • Need for justification and traceability
  • Terminology repository should include
  • Basic common notions
  • Most frequently used terms relating to A/G
    CNS/ATM functions

14
Measure 2 Harmonisation of the structure of SES
and EASA regulatory materials
  • Common principles to define the mandatory and
    voluntary requirements
  • Regulatory materials should have the same level
    in terms of legal binding power
  • Means of compliance of both environments (i.e.
    EASA CS and AMC/GM and SES CS) should have the
    same status with respect to mandatory requirements

15
Measure 3 Approach for the development of SES
and EASA regulatory materials for air-ground
CNS/ATM
  • Development of EASA and SES regulatory materials
    should be supported by a methodical approach
  • Allocation of regulatory requirements affecting
    the same subjects between EASA and SES materials
  • Management mechanisms defining traceability
    information of applicable requirements
    originating from different documents
  • Definition of the object subject to the
    assessment of conformity or suitability for use,
    and/or the verification
  • Consideration by SES rulemaking of other
    requirements with a direct impact on the
    implementation of these regulations

16
Implementation of regulations and specifications
before the operation phase
17
Measure 1 Extension of EASA certification
process to SES conformity assessment
  • How EASA certification process and operational
    approval process might be extended to the
    verification of compliance of airborne
    constituents
  • Role and responsibility of manufacturers, of EASA
    and NSA authorities with respect to conformity of
    airborne constituents
  • Supervision of compliance by NSAs
  • Application to airborne constituents
  • Interface with EASA procedures

18
Measure 2 Harmonization of the role and
responsibility of Notified Bodies and
Qualified Entities
  • How roles and responsibilities of Qualified
    Entity and Notified Body in both EASA and SES
    environment might be harmonized
  • Role as EASA/ NSA delegates in
  • The different phases of the certification and
    verification of conformity processes
  • The organisation capacity approval process

19
Measure 3 Notion of organisation capacity
approval in SES environment
  • Applicability of organisation capacity approval
    under SES environment as a means to alleviate the
    implementation of conformity processes
  • This organisation capacity approval is not
    directly related to the certification of
    providers of services
  • How the EASA organisation capacity approval
    principles
  • Might apply to organisations maintaining EATMN
    constituents and systems
  • Might be extended to other phases of the system
    life cycle.

20
Measure 4 Applicability of "Type Certification"
in SES environment
  • Conformity processes based on type certificate
    apply to products manufactured by replicating the
    type-design product
  • Applicability of type certificate as a means to
    alleviate the implementation of conformity
    processes
  • The measure consists in defining
  • How the type certificate might apply to EATMN
    CNS constituents
  • How the type certificate might apply to EATMN
    systems that are replicated with specific
    configuration items

21
Measure 5 Harmonisation of conformity assessment
and safety assessment processes in SES environment
  • Support organisations in the delineation of the
    object to be considered within assessment
  • Clarify the terms upgrade for a conformity
    assessment and change for a safety assessment
    and acceptance
  • Refine the status of the Certificate of
    Conformity delivered by a Notified Body
  • Make best use of conformity assessment and safety
    assessment processes to avoid duplication of
    effort

22
Measure 6 Supervision of compliance before
putting into service
  • How the supervision of compliance before putting
    into service might be implemented by adapting
    EASA mechanisms to the SES environment
  • How the supervision of compliance might be
    interfaced with the SES safety oversight process

23
Monitoring of compliance during the operations
24
Measure 1 Implementation of the supervision of
compliance
  • To ensure that the EATMN constituents and systems
    continue to comply with the relevant
    interoperability requirements
  • How EASA continuing airworthiness principles
    might apply to the supervision of compliance for
    EATMN constituents and systems
  • How to ensure that this supervision of compliance
    is coordinated with EASA continuing airworthiness
    for airborne constituents

25
Measure 2 Management of the maintenance
  • Role of maintenance organisations with regards to
    interoperability requirements
  • Ad-hoc qualification process for the
    organisations maintaining EATMN constituents and
    systems
  • Application of this qualification process to
    ANSPs and its extension to third parties

26
Measure 3 Management of the decommissioning of
EATMN constituents
  • The impact of the decommissioning and a possible
    future reuse
  • The measure consists in defining
  • How to ensure that the modified EATMN system
    (after decommissioning) still complies with SES
    interoperability requirements
  • How to manage the possible re-use of constituents
    with regards to interoperability requirements

27
Measure 4 Management of the non-compliance cases
  • How operators, avionics manufacturers should
    point out to CAs any non-compliance cases of
    airborne constituents
  • How manufacturers and ANSPs should advise NSAs
    any non-compliance cases of constituents
  • How the European Commission, CAs and NSA should
    manage non-compliance cases, safeguard measures
    and coordinate their actions

28
SES Interoperability of non EU aircraft
29
Measure Procedures ensuring interoperability of
third country aircraft
  • Conformity of aircraft to SES interoperability
    requirements should be fully guaranteed by
  • The application of the relevant international
    standards and
  • The means of compliance to these standards
    evidenced during the certification process
  • Harmonised standards would be the basis on which
  • Conformity of aircraft of non-European design
    could be assessed through the EASA bilateral
    validation processes in place with the State of
    Design
  • Conformity of non-European operators fleets and
    procedures could be shown or acknowledged through
    the future Implementing Rule of the new EASA
    Basic Regulation, taking into account possible
    bilateral provisions with the State of the
    Operator

30
  • Questions
  • CATF members are invited
  • To take note of the progress achieved
  • To comment on the proposed measures.

31
Agenda Item 4
Extension of Guidelines for the Verification of
Constituents and Systems Jean-Paul
Doré Regulatory Unit
32
Implementation of conformity assessment of EATMN
constituents systems
Harmonisation of the implementation of
conformity assessment of constituents and systems
  • Define guidance materials to address key issues
  • Objects, subject to verification and declaration
    (constituents systems)
  • Scope of verifications
  • Criteria to renew EC declarations (upgrade of
    systems)

33
Definition of EATMN constituents and systems
  • For the short term
  • Definition of EATMN systems at rather high level
    by re-using elements of definition from legacy
    solutions, OATA/SESAR architecture
  • Support to the identification of EATMN systems
    subject to EC verification
  • For the medium term
  • Definition of EATMN reference architecture used
    by interoperability implementing rules (possible
    update of Annex I) in consistency with SESAR
    architecture

34
Scope of the guidelines
  • Three main parts
  • Part A Definition of EATMN systems
  • Part B Notion of operational characteristics of
    systems
  • Part C Definition of CNS-type constituents

35
Part A Definition of EATMN systems
  • Approach for the definition of EATMN systems
  • Development plan for the definition of EATMN
    systems
  • Definition of the first subset of EATMN systems
  • Validation of the proposed definitions

36
Part A Definition of EATMN Systems
  • Definition of EATMN
  • Relationship between EATMN elements
  • Criteria for belonging to EATMN (test systems,
    shadow systems,..)
  • Administration of EATMN (from regulatory
    standpoints)
  • Identification, naming of EATMN systems
  • Integration, putting into service

37
Part A Definition of EATMN systems
Single system for CA Assembly of constituents EC
Declaration/Technical File
General definition of EATMN systems
Definition of EATMN systems supporting ATM
operations
Definition of EATMN systems supporting CNS
operations
Sources of definition of architecture elements
(SESAR arch) Link between EATMN system and
external sources of definition of architecture
elements
Sources of definition of architecture elements
(ARTAS, SESAR arch) Link between EATMN system
and external sources of definition of
architecture elements Organisational context
38
Part B Notion of operational characteristics
  • Analysis of modifications of systems through 3
    views to screen them into 2 categories
  • Modification with impact on operational
    characteristic
  • Modification without impact on operational
    characteristic
  • 3 views
  • SES compliance view
  • System architecture view
  • End users view

39
Part B SES compliance view
  • All along the lifetime of a system,
    identification and upgrade of
  • Regulatory baseline
  • Community Specifications baseline
  • Modification of the regulatory baseline must
    entail a revised EC declaration and TF
  • Modification of CS baseline might entail a
    revised EC declaration and TF, or a revised TF
    only

40
Part B System architect view
  • Analysis of modification of systems architecture
  • Modifications of the infrastructure and platform
    layer should not be considered as an operational
    upgrade
  • Modification of domain-dependent layers might be
    considered as an operational upgrade

41
Part B End users view
  • Analysis of modifications in
  • Use Cases, ATC Manuals
  • Provision and use of communication, navigation,
    surveillance services
  • Provision and use of aeronautical information
    services
  • Provision and use of meteorological information
    services

42
Part C Definition of CNS type-constituents
  • Approach for drafting the definition of CNS
    type-constituents
  • Definition of the first subset of CNS
    type-constituents
  • Recommendations for manufacturers

43
Key milestones
  • Tender submission deadline 2 July 2008
  • Start date First half of September
  • Draft guidelines February 2009

44
Agenda Item 7
Overview of SES Architecture Activities Shanda
Cordingley SESAR ATM Strategy
45
Overview of SESAR Architecture
ActivitiesEuropean ATM Architecture for 2020
from Data Exchange to SWIM
Shanda Cordingley, 2.4.1 O level CATF13 - 26
June 08
46
Main Drivers for Change
  • Key ATM Target Concept elements impacting EATMS
    architecture
  • SWIM
  • No more current data exchange based on point to
    point messages
  • BUSINESS TRAJECTORY
  • No more partial trajectories used independently
  • NETWORK MANAGEMENT
  • Network management functionalities distributed in
    numerous systems
  • ASAS
  • More ATM functionalities on the airborne side
  • Ground systems to integrate ASAS manoeuvres

? sharing of information to support all ATM
operations
? shared trajectory, gate-to-gate
47
Logical Architecture the link to the ConOps
  • System functions identified from ConOps
  • Allocated to logical architecture modules
  • represent functions and information to be managed
    by the ATM system

48
Technical Architecture - ATM Systems and
Sub-Systems
  • Local/Sub-regional systems
  • Regional systems
  • Integrates the aircraft
  • SWIM mechanisms G/G and A/G
  • Safety requirements
  • high levels of availability, continuity,
    integrity
  • Information security
  • increases needed due to increased information
    access through SWIM
  • Manage environmental constraints and measure
    performances
  • provisions within each stakeholders systems

49
SWIM Principles
  • SWIM services added-value information
    management services
  • Flexible and modular sharing of information
  • Transparent access to ATM services
  • Overall consistency
  • Data Model for agreed precise definition of
    information

50
Main Aircraft Architecture Evolutions
  • New Flight Manager and Flight Guidance
    sub-systems
  • 4D trajectories and special approaches (curved,
    steep and offset optimised trajectories) to
    improve performance and reduce environmental
    impact
  • Direct air to air exchanges to support ATSAW,
    ASAS Spacing and Separation and ASAS Self
    Separation
  • impacts all communication, navigation and
    surveillance sub-systems

Ground SWIM Network
SWIM Supervision
51
Main Regional Systems Architecture Evolutions
  • Aeronautical Information Management Regional,
    Sub-regional and Local
  • greater co-operation via SWIM to share static and
    dynamic information for the benefit of all EATMS
    Stakeholders.
  • Advanced Airspace Management
  • support and facilitate the design, development
    and publication of an optimal European airspace
    structure.
  • Network Information Management
  • regional collaborative Air Traffic Flow
    Capacity Management processes with
    local/sub-regional actors through Network
    Operations Plan (NOP).

Ground SWIM Network
SWIM Supervision
Aerodrome ATC
52
Main Sub-Regional/Local Systems Architecture
Evolutions
  • En-route and Approach ATC Centres
  • more system automation (several roles ? more
    strategic planning and monitoring in execution
    phases of a flight)
  • sub-regional coordination regarding Traffic
    Demand and Capacity Balancing, Traffic Flow, and
    Resource management and collaboration with the
    regional instances
  • Aerodrome ATC and Airport Airside Operations
    systems
  • provision and access to a commonly shared data
    available through SWIM for queue management
    improvements
  • AOC ATM
  • change from submission of flight plans to
    pre-departure management and publication of
    preferred 4D trajectories

Ground SWIM Network
SWIM Supervision
53
Definition Phase Architecture Conclusion
  • an EATMS architecture is feasible and will
    provide the required information sharing
    capability that is essential to make the SESAR
    Concept work
  • but note,
  • The ConOps and its associated performance
    framework require a new approach for future
    systems architecture and development
  • more modular
  • multi-domain collaboration with each
    stakeholder group to ensure that all business
    needs and access to information are fairly
    addressed
  • addressing the whole life-cycle right from
    operational concept development
  • Architecture design principles, based on modern
    system engineering techniques, have been
    identified for the development of the future
    European ATM system, e.g.
  • Enterprise Architecture
  • Service-Oriented approach
  • SWIM mechanisms

54
Next Steps SESAR Joint Undertaking (SJU)
SJU
A/1 Work Programme Management
D - ATM Network RD Programme
B (High Level) Target Concept Architecture
Maintenance
C - Master Plan Maintenance
E Long-Term Innovative Research Programme
3 - Validation Infrastructure Adaptation and
Integration
2 - RD Overall Consistency
16 Transversal Areas
Transversal Thread
13 Network System
11 Flight Operation Centre System
9 Aircraft System
7 - Network Operation
5 - TMA Operation
10 EN-Route TMA ATC System
12 - Airport System
14 - SWIM
4 - En Route Operation
6 - Airport Operations
8 - Information Management
15 CNS System
Operational Thread
System Thread
SWIM Thread
55
Mapping of Systems to SJU WPs
9 Aircraft System
13 Network System
14 SWIM
10 EN-Route TMA ATC System
12 - Airport System
15 CNS System
11 Flight Operation Centre System
56
Overview of SESAR Architecture
ActivitiesQuestions?
www.atmmasterplan.eu CATF13 - 26 June 08
57
Agenda Item 5
Implementation of Conformity Assessment of
Systems The Spanish Approach Enrique Gismera
Gomez AENA
58
CATF 13 Implementation of conformity
assessment of systems The Spanish
Approach (AENA)
ENRIQUE GISMERA
DIVISIÓN DE VERIFICACIÓN DE SISTEMAS
DIRECCIÓN DE INGENIERÍA Y EXPLOTACIÓN TÉCNICA
59
Contents
60
Introduction (I)
  • The System Verification Division
  • Was created in December 07.
  • Within the Engineering and Technical
    Exploitation Directorate of Aena.
  • To deal with
  • Coordination of Interoperability Regulation
    application.
  • RE 2096/2005 (safety aspects) mainly Safety
    Management.
  • Key aspect System Verification Division
    independency (agreement with NSA).

61
Introduction (II)
62
Introduction (III)
DAUT Automated Systems Division
DCOM Communication Division
DNV/DNS SurvNav Divisions
DCOM Communication Division
DNV/DNS SurvNav Divisions
DAUT Automated Systems Division
63
Aena CA Status - SYSTEMS
DAUT Automated Systems Division
DCOM Communication Division
DNS Satellite Nav Division
DNV/DNS SurvNav Divisions
DNV Surveillance Area
DNV Nav-Aids Area
GBAS
1
  • Reg. 552/2004 - Annex I - Systems
  • ATS 1
  • COM 180
  • NAV 272
  • SUR 48
  • AIS 1

TOTAL 502
64
Aena CA Status CONSTITUENTS (I)
Issue 1 Definition of Constituent
  • Just one Constituent defined in IOP Regulation
    (Tx/Rx in Reg.1265/2007).
  • Aena finds no advantage in defining constituents
    by itself
  • Therefore SYSTEMCONSTITUENT is a valid approach
    (except for Tx/Rx) until Eurocontrol finally
    issues their Guidelines.
  • Some aspects in Aena procedures (and maybe
    Manufacturer) depend on the definition and number
    of Constituents
  • A solid definition may be undertaken with strong
    participation of Manufacturers.
  • The development of Eurocontrol-Guidelines should
    be carried out jointly with the Manufacturers.

65
Aena CA Status CONSTITUENTS (II)
Issue 2 Constituent definition approaches
  • There are different approaches depending on who
    defines the constituent
  • Regulation the Declaration of Constituents MUST
    be issued.
  • Manufacturer the Declaration of Constituents is
    part of the strategy of putting something in the
    market.
  • ANSP
  • Declaration of Constituents should fit into the
    verification of the System.
  • Strong relationship foreseen between Declaration
    of Systems and Declaration of Constituents,
    though not explicit in Regulation.
  • The Manufacturer is not obliged by Regulation.
  • AENA fits the Declaration of Constituents into
    its process (mandatory at least Suitability for
    Use), but some problems may arise.

66
Aena CA Status CONSTITUENTS (III)
Issue 3 Declaration of Constituents content
  • RE EC Nº 552/2004 defines
  • Declaration of Systems content clearly
    described (Annex IV).
  • Declaration for Constituents content vaguely
    described (Annex III).
  • RE EC Nº 1032/2006 and RE EC Nº 633/2006 define
  • Declaration of Systems reference to 552/2004
    (Annexes IV-B/C and IV-A/B).
  • Declaration of Constituents very detailed
    description of how to carry out the process
    (Annexes IV-A and II).
  • What to do if only 552/2204 applies?
  • What to do if 552, 1032 and 633 apply? (i.e.
    OLDI in ATM Systems) different depth in
    Declarations of Constituents depending on which
    Regulation applies?

67
System Verification Status - PROCEDURE
2.1 MANAGEMENT OF THE CA PLAN
Procedure agreed with NSA (from Eurocontrol
Initial Guidelines)
68
EC Declaration Technical File
  • One EC Declaration Technical File per system.
  • At first, the validity of EC Declaration is
    associated to the system lifetime.
  • However some events shall trigger the
    modification of the Declaration
  • New Regulation.
  • System Requirements major changes.
  • Technical File contains all the evidences to
    support the EC Declaration.
  • The Verification Matrix summarizes the whole
    process.

69
Verification Matrix
  • For a particular System it presents traceability
    among
  • User requirements (1).
  • Interoperability requirements aplicable to the
    system (2).
  • Reference material (4).
  • (3) Traceability must be assured in the four
    verification phases Overall Design, Development
    and Integration, Operational and Maintenance.

To carry out the Verification Matrix means to
give enough evidences of the Interoperability
Requirements fulfilment in every verification
phase.
70
Example introduction of new ATM function
X Function
Change in ATM-System
EC Declaration T.F.
71
Example introduction of new ATM function
X Function
Change in ATM-System
EC Declaration T.F.
REF.MAT
USER REQUIREMENTS
CS-SPEC-106
AENA-SPEC
OACI-SPEC
72
AENA Other issues to be solved
  • Question 1 Ground/Ground Communications System
    Verification
  • Mainly composed by non aeronautical COTS.
  • Based on non aeronautical standards (i.e.
    TCP-IP) and use of Telco (not SES certified)
    networks (based on SLA).
  • System verification difficult to be done as per
    the rest of systems (i.e. Safety Evidences).
  • Question 2 ARINC/SITA/INMARSAT not obliged to
    be Certified under SES Regulation, Will they be
    certified for DLS services?
  • Recommendation 1 It is not easy to track the
    publication of Regulations and CSs ? A
    Communication (via CATF?) would be advisable.

73
QUESTIONS
74
Agenda Item 6
Relationship between Implementing Rules,
Specifications and Means of Compliance Jean-Paul
Doré Regulatory Unit
75
Overview of interoperability IRRelationship with
MOCs
76
Notion of CS/Presumption of Conformity
  • Recital (15)
  • The putting into service of ATM systems should
    be subject to verification of compliance with the
    ERs and relevant IRs for interoperability use of
    CSs creates a presumption of conformity with ERs
    and relevant IRs for interoperability
  • A CS contains requirements refining EATMN
    solution compliant with relevant IR(s)
  • Relationship between CS / IR ? Relationship
    between CS requirements and IR regulatory
    requirements

77
Overview of interoperability IRRelationship with
CSs
Interoperability implementing rule
Dependent on requirements from external sources
Requirements Explanatory notes
CS
Requirements Explanatory notes
CS
78
Regulation Community Specifications (SESAR View)
79
CS Requirements
  • CS requirements independent from any external
    source
  • to specify functional, operational properties
  • CS requirements dependent on external source
  • to filter out which requirements from an external
    source are applicable
  • to overwrite specific requirements from an
    external source
  • to specify requirements solving well-identified
    PDRs (Defect Reports) of external source
  • to make reference to the appropriate
    version/edition of external documents

80
CSs specifying several means of compliance
  • Why several MOCs?
  • To divide a complex function spanning several
    layers into smaller independent units
  • To create a well-bounded window to manage
    dependency with external sources of requirements
  • To define alternative solutions
  • Example DLS Specification
  • Air-ground data link services (DLIC, ACM, ACL,
    AMC)
  • End-to-end communications
  • Air-ground mobile data communications
  • Operational procedures

81
CS / MOCs
Interoperability implementing rule
MOC 1
MOC1?MOC2
MOC 2
CS
MOC 3
CS
82
CS / MOCs
MOC1?(MOC2?MOC3)
?
MOC 1
MOC 2
MOC 3
CS
MOC 3
CS
83
MOC Declaration in CS
MOC Descriptor
84
EASA and SES dependent specificationsTwo
regulatory systems
EASA
SES
?
?
?
Regulations
SES Safety acceptance CA of constituents systems
SES Community Specs ECTRL Specs
A/C, CNS/ATM equipt Operators, orgs ANSPs, etc
EASA Airworthiness cert. Operational
approval Approval of orgs.
EASA AMCs, GMs, TGLs
CONFORMITY ?
MOC
85
EASA and SES dependent specifications Air-ground
interoperability
  • EASA and SES dependent specifications
  • should rely on the relevant set of
    interoperability requirements
  • EASA and SES conformity processes
  • must be applied with the appropriate
    interoperability requirements baseline to ensure
    end-to-end interoperability of airborne and
    ground constituents

86
EASA and SES dependent specifications (SESAR View)
87
Question and Answer Session
88
Agenda Item 8
Open Tour de Table for Reporting on Conformity
Assessment Activities
89
Agenda Item 9
  • Outcomes of CATF12 Actions
  • MET Systems
  • Conformity Assessment Training

90
MET SYSTEMS - Responses (1/2)
  • Action 1
  • NSAs and ANSPs are invited to communicate their
    interpretation of the applicability of the
    interoperability Regulation requirements to MET
    systems.
  • 6 responses
  • ANSP not certified to provide MET services.
  • MET information to be verified as part of other
    groups of systems (e.g. AIS or ATS systems).
  • Gathering of MET data is outside scope IOP
    regulation.
  • IOP applies to the MET systems (and procedures)
    that process, display and communicate MET data
    (i.e. exporting it from the ANSP with systems
    such as ATIS and AFTN). Example SAMOS PAMOS.

91
MET SYSTEMS - Responses (2/2)
  • MET data SERVICE
  • Therefore consider MET info systems i.e. data
    processing
  • (not MET data systems i.e. acquisition and
    display).
  • IOP regulation no systems for acquisition of MET
    information
  • Except
  • IRVR (could be considered a constituent of
    Navigation Systems).
  • Weather radar systems (could be considered as
    constituents of Surveillance Systems).
  • Attention thus on ANSP end user systems
    constituents
  • DSUs only for such end user systems.
  • The following MET systems can be broken down into
    constituents
  • Automated Weather Observing Systems (AWOS) at
    airports
  • Automated self-briefing systems at airports
  • Dedicated information systems at ACCs
  • ATIS, D-ATIS
  • VOLMET, D-VOLMET

92
MET SYSTEMS Proposed Approach
  • OUTSIDE EATMN
  • MET systems to collect, process and provide MET
    information to the first 7 systems (mainly
    systems for air traffic flow management, air
    traffic services) identified in Annex I of the
    interoperability Regulation
  • PART OF EATMN
  • MET systems providing MET information to pilots
    via data link (D-ATIS and D-VOLMET).
  • PLEASE SEND BACK YOUR VIEWS!

93
Training Requirements in Conformity Assessment
(1/2)
  • Action 2
  • NSAs and ANSPs are invited to communicate their
    requirements on training material to be developed
    in the conformity assessment area.
  • 3 responses
  • CA Assurance Activity (safety assurance,
    software assurance, quality assurance, test
    integration assurance). Such courses run by
    certification bodies (e.g. DNV, BSI, SGS, Bureau
    Veritas).
  • Basic training on verification activities CBT.
  • Once more IRs and CSs more detailed training
  • List of proposed subject areas (ref. AP CATF
    13.5, item 3.3)

94
Training Requirements in CA Proposed Way
Forward (2/2)
  • 1st step - extension of Guidelines to support CA
    of EATM systems and constituents by ANSPs and
    manufacturers
  • 2nd step complement, as appropriate, general
    regulatory training package with conformity
    assessment material

95
EUROCONTROL Regulatory Training Current and
planned (1/3)
  • Current ATM training
  • courses at IANS (Institute of Air Navigation
    Services, Luxembourg) addresses
  • safety regulations and other regulatory
    requirements
  • Revised training package
  • current courses will be updated to reflect
    changes in the European regulatory
  • framework (SES I II, EASA, SESAR aspects) and
    based on a customer survey

96
EUROCONTROL Regulatory Training incl. CA
Planned (2/3)
  • Safety regulatory training
  • mandatory and optional courses aimed at giving
    NSA participants skills and competencies
  • Other regulatory training
  • voluntary participation at courses aimed at
    raising awareness and knowledge for participants
    from civil/military ATM stakeholders (NSAs,
    ANSPs, AOs, manufacturers, notified bodies)
  • A revised training package for classroom and
    e-learning courses will address
  • Regulatory framework - ICAO SARPS, SES
    Regulations/Implementing Rules/ Community
    Specifications, EASA and SESAR aspects
  • Specific on interoperability - essential
    requirements, conformity assessment of EATM
    systems and constituents, notified bodies and
    actual interoperability implementing rules

97
EUROCONTROL Regulatory Training incl. CA Next
steps and Recommendation (3/3)
  • Next steps
  • A customer survey performed by IANS during
    Summer/Autumn 2008 to determine stakeholders
    requirements
  • Present outcome of survey and draft training
    package at workshop in Autumn 2008
  • Updated/new training package will be implemented
    during 2009
  • Recommendation
  • CATF members support the proposed way forward for
    regulatory training incl. CA training and
    contribute to the customer survey

98
Agenda Item 10
Any Other Business Date of next Meeting
99
Proposed Date for CATF14
  • Thursday 27th November 2008, 10H00 16H30
  • EUROCONTROL HQ, VEGA Meeting Room

100
Conformity Assessment Task ForceMeeting 13
EUROCONTROL Headquarters POLLUX Meeting Room 26
June 2008
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com