1. Federal Aviation Administration Data Communications Program Data Comm Trials and Production Requirements: High Level Impact Presented To: DCIT #23 Plenary Prepared By: Data Comm Production Sub WG Date: 9 May 2013

2. 2 Federal Aviation Administration DCP Production-Trials Impact DCIT #23, 9 May 2013 DCIT #22 Action Item Carry over from last DCIT meeting to show impact of Trials on the Production system as risk mitigation. –Provide insight into the numbers and types of requirement changes from DCIT and Trials that have impacted Production system. Include pre-DTAP PTR changes, e.g., drop UM73 and add UM79 and UM83 Categorize the changes, e.g., break the system vs. nice-to-have vs. new requirements –Provide high level assessment of impact to Production system Risk reduction – show how these would have otherwise created problems with Production system. Qualitative assessment - ROM would be desirable but at least provide High, Med, Low qualitative. 2

3. 3 Federal Aviation Administration DCP Production-Trials Impact DCIT #23, 9 May 2013 Requirement Changes: Life Cycle Impact Pre-March 2012 –Major requirements changes prior to initial Production baseline in March 2012 (ERAM CDR Baseline, TDLS Initial Baseline WSSD 2.0) –Requirements Drop UM73 Cleared as Filed UM79, UM83 for revisions rather than UM80 Modifications for FMS auto loading, especially concerning transition fixes –Benefits Most required for operational acceptability Allow auto-loading across various types of equipage Identified variations/anomalies with FANS standards –Impact ~30 changes in March 2012 WSSD Majority are high impact, e.g., operationally required and resulted in new messages, new CHI 3

4. 4 Federal Aviation Administration DCP Production-Trials Impact DCIT #23, 9 May 2013 Requirement Changes Life Cycle Impact – cont’d Post-March 2012 Changes –Requirements Delayed Session Termination Dispatch Copy Format and Timing/Gate Request Message Initial UM79 Second Frequency/Contact Various PTRs (see next slides) –Benefits Additional modifications for operational acceptability Additional sites/operational scenarios –Impact ~10 changes in Sept 2012, some to revise previous requirements ~41 total WSSD changes ~4 IRD changes across 3 IRDs = ~45 total DCL changes are generally high impact, e.g., operationally required and resulted in new messages, new CHI AOC changes are medium to low impact 4

5. 5 Federal Aviation Administration DCP Production-Trials Impact DCIT #23, 9 May 2013 DTAP PTRs impact on S1P1 Summary PTRs from DTAP –Production SE tower sub-team scrubbed #1-110 with DTAP Test Team at Tech Ctr in Feb 2013; approx. 25 marked as potential impact to S1P1 –Current PTR file (April 23) has 155; MITRE has scrubbed 111-155 but these have not yet been reviewed by full Production sub-team team –Most PTRs assumed to affect TDLS, but some could also impact ERAM, e.g., logon, or interfaces –Rapid turnover during Trials testing (MEM and now EWR) is a challenge Categories –Avionics, including CHI –Ground System, including CHI –AOC Interface –Test Cases 5

6. 6 Federal Aviation Administration DCP Production-Trials Impact DCIT #23, 9 May 2013 DTAP PTRs impact on S1P1 Summary- cont’d Impact –Many PTRs not applicable due to differences in architecture and software systems –Most valuable in identifying avionics issues, which will be applicable to Production as well –Some scenarios represent good test cases even if no requirement or design change; mitigates risk of not finding lower level problems by providing complex scenarios –May have resulted in design changes even if no specific requirement changes, e.g., FEC and CAF changes impact on CSCI allocations and CHI –Quick Look – high level summary only ~26 PTRs with requirement impact ~25 PTRs with analysis, design or test impact 6

7. 7 Federal Aviation Administration DCP Production-Trials Impact DCIT #23, 9 May 2013 DTAP PTRs Impact on Production: Quick Look Total DTAP PTRs = 155

8. 8 Federal Aviation Administration DCP Production-Trials Impact DCIT #23, 9 May 2013 DCIT/DTAP-based High Level Requirements to Prod #Function Description/ PurposeStatusResolutionCommentsPriority Impact (H, M, L) 1 Auto Loading for Complex ClearancesOpen TBD if will be added to DCP requirement specifications. No current differentiation about clearance typesHH 2 Auto Loading Requirement on ATS Ground System Provide clearances that are auto- loadable in the majority of avionicsOpen TBD if will be added to DCP requirement specifications. De facto operational requirement but not a program level requirement. Has been the source of multiple added system level requirements for messaging.HH 3 Revised DCL using UM79, UM83 and UM169 in place of UM80 (full route clearance) Need for partial routes to avoid FMS reloading issues with UM80 on revised DCL.ClosedAdded to WSSD 2.0 ATC Automation Rules for DTAP and TDLS to develop Revised DCLs using UM79, UM83, UM169 and where necessary us UM80.HH 4 Reject DM25 if free text concatenated Standards allow but program does not. Nothing except DM25 will be accepted.Resolved To be added to WSSD 3.0 in Jun 2013MM 5 Cleared as Filed (CAF) Address FMS loading issues by sending CAF instead of UM80 for initial DCLClosed To be added to WSSD 3.0 in Jun 2013 HH

9. 9 Federal Aviation Administration DCP Production-Trials Impact DCIT #23, 9 May 2013 DCIT/DTAP-based Requirement Changes – cont’d #Function Description/ PurposeStatusResolutionCommentsPriority Impact (H, M, L) 6 Transition Fix in route clearance Repetition and cross- checking, esp. for arrival procedures to allow FMS loadingResolved To be added to WSSD 3.0 in Jun 2013 Some in earlier WSSD, but modifications still being addedHH 7 Delayed Session Termination on Dept. Avoid cockpit alert during critical takeoff phase when flight departsResolved To be added to WSSD 3.0 in Jun 2013HH 8 AOC Courtesy Copy/Dispatch Copy Format Change to format and content of AOC message.Resolved To be added to TIMS- CSP IRD in July 2013 Some in earlier IRD, but modifications still being addedMM 9 Gate Request(surface location) Message Change in timing of Dispatch/Courtesy Copy resulted in new message for gate ID at earlier time.Resolved Modification to surface location message be added to WSSD 3.0 in Jun 2013 Some in earlier WSSD, but modifications still being addedMM 10NAT Tracks Handle NAT Tracks, which are defined dynamically (daily)Resolved To be added to WSSD 3.0 in Jun 2013 Same short-term fix using Initial UM79 as for International FlightsHH 11 Initial UM79 for International Flights Handle NAT Tracks and unknown route elements in international flight plansResolved To be added to WSSD 3.0 in Jun 2013HH

10. 10 Federal Aviation Administration DCP Production-Trials Impact DCIT #23, 9 May 2013 DCIT/DTAP-based Requirement Changes – cont’d #Function Description/ PurposeStatusResolutionCommentsPriority Impact (H, M, L) 12 Ignore optional 24-bit address in Logon Info Ground systems to ignore for FANS since some are not set correctly.Closed Lower level CMAP and TDLS derivations checked to ensure not being usedLL 13 AOC Courtesy Copy/Dispatch Copy Content Provide full route string on any DCC that does not have it, for both initial and revisions.Resolved To be added to WSSD 3.0 in Jun 2013 and IRD in July 2013 Some in earlier documents, but modifications still being addedMM 14 UM169 content and format for clearance data items Route elements not included in the route clearance UM xx but required in the DCL clearance; inserted as free text in UM169. Multiple instances, e.g., SIDs and climbout procedures.Resolved To be added to WSSD 3.0 in Jun 2013HH 15 Controller override of CAF Provide CHI and override functionality to allow controller to force a full route clearance ( or as much of the route as possible.)Resolved To be added to WSSD 3.0 in Jun 2013 Initial override (no CAF) modified to address international flights.HH

11. 11 Federal Aviation Administration DCP Production-Trials Impact DCIT #23, 9 May 2013 DCIT/DTAP-based Requirement Changes – cont’d #Function Description/ PurposeStatusResolutionCommentsPriority Impact (H, M, L) 16UM83 switch Allow UM83 functionality to be built in but disabled on initial releaseRejected Production will build UM83HH 17 Multiple DM25 requests Provide manual uplink of full route clearance on subsequent clearance requestsResolved To be added to WSSD 3.0 in Jun 2013 Controller to manually send a UM80, or UM79 if a UM80 cannot be sentHH 18 Arrival/Departure procedure inclusion in DCL Arrival and Departure procedures are optional. If included and revised, send even if no change.Resolved To be added to WSSD 3.0 in Jun 2013 Clarified during earlier tower reviews also that DP is optional. Added requirements to include SID, transition, and Climb- out whenever one of three is modified HH 19 Notify controller of outstanding UNABLEs If flight departs with unprocessed UNABLE, notify controllerResolved To be added to WSSD 3.0 in Jun 2013MM

12. 12 Federal Aviation Administration DCP Production-Trials Impact DCIT #23, 9 May 2013 Observations/Lessons Learned: Maturity Ideal = Serial –Trials “try out” and validate operational requirements –If valid, then transferred to Production for system implementation Reality = Parallel –Trials still changing requirements Production baselined in March 2012 for Logon and flight data (En Route) Tower held open to 4/15/13 –Trials mitigate operational acceptability risk but may add schedule risk to Production

13. 13 Federal Aviation Administration DCP Production-Trials Impact DCIT #23, 9 May 2013 Observations/Lessons Learned – cont’d Handoff/Tech Transfer from DCIT/DTAP to Production –New Requirements Need tech transfer documentation vehicle to clearly capture the problem, disposition across multiple spec docs, and track Formal DCIT Plenary agreement on Req->DTAP specs->Trials - >Refine Req ->Handoff to Production->Production specs->SW Development PTRs are bugs against Reqs; should not be used for new requirements, although some are listed as out of scope on PTR list –Forum DCIT WG reps, DTAP and S1P1 SE need to all be involved in “handoff” to ensure operational and system requirements are well understood

14. 14 Federal Aviation Administration DCP Production-Trials Impact DCIT #23, 9 May 2013 Observations/Lessons Learned – cont’d Implementation in Production –Impacted by differences in system architectures May require different requirements for Production system May result in different potential impact than when proposed for Trials –Considerable SE LOE to understand, analyze and evaluate the DTAP PTRs for applicability to Production system Understand requirement discrepancy, especially at lower levels Evaluate maturity and consistency with other system requirements Assess impact

15. 15 Federal Aviation Administration DCP Production-Trials Impact DCIT #23, 9 May 2013 Observations/Lessons Learned – cont’d En Route Trials –Start DCIT En Route Trials as soon as possible to gain the most benefit –Need Serial, not Parallel –En Route use cases and specs will soon be leaving the station...

16. 16 Federal Aviation Administration DCP Production-Trials Impact DCIT #23, 9 May 2013 Back Up

17. 17 Federal Aviation Administration DCP Production-Trials Impact DCIT #23, 9 May 2013 History - DCIT Requirement Changes Primary Focus of DCIT is on the Trials Jan – June 2011, DCIT #1-6 –Focus on team organization (WGs, charter, agreements, Trials site selection, processes) June 2011, DCIT 6 –Flight Deck WG. Initial “requirements” discussions, e.g., complex clearances and autoloading into FMS, Tailored Arrivals –Initial operational E2E description, e.g., ops requirements –Outbrief on AOC-Tower data exchange, e.g., flight plan, courtesy copies (aka dispatch message), Subscriber DB July-Sep 2011, DCIT 7-9 –Initial ops requirements for Revised DCLs using UM79, UM83 rather than UM80 –Initial discussions about airways, intersections, other auto-loading problems. –Initial discussions about session termination changes Oct – Nov 2011, DCIT 10-11 –Initial discussions about providing DCL 45 min prior to P-Time –Reject of DM25 with concatenated free text –Initial discussions about CAF

18. 18 Federal Aviation Administration DCP Production-Trials Impact DCIT #23, 9 May 2013 History-cont’d Jan – Mar 2012, DCIT 12-13 –AOC Courtesy Copy initial format discussions –Initial delayed session termination requirements –CAF requirements Apr-June 2012, DCIT 14-16 –Added route string to AOC Dispatch message for CAF July – Dec 2012, DCIT 17-20 –Refinements based on additional avionics and DTAP testing Multiple AFN Log On’s DM25, including multiple downlink requests CAF Lat/longs, NAT Tracks Jan – Mar 2013, DCIT 21-22 –AOC Dispatch Message format changes, e.g., headers –UM83 switch (revert to UM80 when disabled) –Route string to AOC message on revisions

19. 19 Federal Aviation Administration DCP Production-Trials Impact DCIT #23, 9 May 2013 DTAP-S1P1 Differences: CPDLC 19 #StatusFunction/ Topic DTAPS1P1Comments 1 ResSession Initiation/FP Correlation DTAP starts on logon S1P1 starts session on controller approval of DCL Known Difference. TBD if requires procedure changes 2 ResSTANDBYDTAP sends STANDBY No STANDBYKnown Difference. TBD if requires procedure changes 3OpenWorld-wide Fix processing DTAP NAV database ERAM NAV database TBD if DTAP will change to use HCS/ERAM DB 4 ResOceanic Tracks (North Atlantic) Use Initial UM79 when not in DTAP NAV DB Use Initial UM79 when not in ERAM NAV database Fix for NAT is same as International; S1P1 implementation specs TBD 5 ResArrival Autoroute inclusion in clearance DTAP includes arrival auto- route (AAR) S1P1 does not include auto-route (AAR) Resolved. Changes to DTAP SSS to disqualify flights if include an AAR

20. 20 Federal Aviation Administration DCP Production-Trials Impact DCIT #23, 9 May 2013 DTAP-S1P1 Differences: Controller Impacts 20 #StatusFunction/ Topic DTAPS1P1Comments 6 ResController CHI Differences Modified COTS display Modified current TDLS PDC display Known Differences. Open issues. 7OpenWhat Route/How much of the route will be cleared Uses HADDS routes and DTAP NAV DB Uses ERAM- generated Data Comm route Expect differences for Initial UM79 for international flights since NAV DBs are different. 8 ResManual Closure of Transactions Allows manualNo manual closure Known Difference. May require procedure changes 9OpenAutomode capability No automode; all DCLs need controller action Automode; only revised DCLs need controller action Plans to implement in future DTAP

21. 21 Federal Aviation Administration DCP Production-Trials Impact DCIT #23, 9 May 2013 DTAP-S1P1 Differences: AOC Messages 21 #StatusFunction/ Topic DTAPS1P1Comments 10 ResDCL vs PDC Flight Identification FRC DCL in REM field; prevents PDC and IDs DCL ICAO 2012 codes in Fld 18, Subscriber DB default Known Difference 11 ResFP Coding for NAT Tracks Users file lat/lon in FP for NAT Use Initial UM79 when not in ERAM NAV database DTAP to use initial UM79. TBD if users will still file lat/lon for NAT, but assume no. 12 ResFallback to PDC N/AHierarchy and fallback mechanism from DCL to PDC Known Difference. Includes timing requirements for DCL/PDC changes; user preferences 13 ResAOC Interface for Dispatch Message BATAP and MATIP COTS protocols Same IFCET MHP protocol, same as current PDC Known Difference. AOCs may need to change SW to use TDLS protocol 14OpenGate ID response timing Combined with Dispatch Message New separate GREQ message due to timing requirements DTAP to build Gate Request in later release?