Aspectos motivacionales ante el aprendizaje de una lengua extranjera

8.1 Conclusions

The safety target was set to demonstrate that:

ST#1 the risk of an accident following the complete conversion to 8.33 kHz VCS shall not be significantly greater than before the start of the introduction of 8.33 kHz VCS below FL 195 ST#2 the risk of an accident during the transition to the complete conversion to 8.33 kHz VCS below FL 195 shall be reduced as far as reasonably practicable.

Subject to the identified Assumptions and issues listed in section 7, the overall conclusion is that deployment of 8.33 kHz VCS in the airspace of IR applicability below FL 195 according to the draft VCS II IR [16] has the potential to satisfy the above Safety Targets.

Specific conclusions are as follows:

1. For the airspace of IR applicability in general there are three risks associated with the deployment of 8.33 kHz VCS:

• an increase in the risk of mistuning to an 8.33 kHz VCS because of the additional digit that has to be selected and, initially, because of a number of airspace users (e.g. General Aviation) unfamiliar with 8.33 kHz VCS above FL 195

• the risk associated with having to accommodate 25 kHz VCS-equipped State aircraft, up to the date by which all such aircraft will have been retrofitted or eventually withdrawn from service; and

• the risk associated with having two different VCS arrangements across the border with the airspace of IR applicability.

In all three cases, Functional Safety Requirements have been derived to reduce the risk to what is likely to be a low level, though that needs to be confirmed by specific safety assessments to be carried out by the States concerned.

2. For the airspace area of applicability defined in IR annex I for which there is an urgent need to solve pressing frequency-shortage problems, which requires conversion of the infrastructure to 8.33 kHz VCS before 31 December 2018, there will be an additional risk associated with operating 25 kHz VCS, non-exempt aircraft in a mix of 25 kHz VCS and 8.33 kHz VCS- equipped sectors / airspace.

Functional Safety Requirements have been derived in order to reduce that risk but, because of the number of variable factors involved and the complexity of the relationships between them, it has not been possible in this necessarily generic safety assessment to determine

quantitatively what that risk would be – that needs to be done by the States / ANSPs concerned.

3. For the airspace of IR applicability, the conversion of frequency assignments should not start until after the date by which the IR requires all non-exempt aircraft using this airspace to be

equipped with 8.33 kHz VCS-equipped radios unless a local safety assessment has been carried out to show that such conversion is safe when considering the different airspace users impacted by this change.

4. For the specific case of ground vehicles operating in the manoeuvring area, there will be a slight increase in the risk of mistuning the frequency/channel. Nevertheless this increase in risk will be very limited because those vehicles will mainly use a single frequency/channel (e.g. the ground or the tower frequency) and will not change it so often. Finally it shall be shown that these systems (fixed or hand-held) used by vehicle drivers are complying at least with the ICAO Annex 10 requirements in order to prevent any harmful interference and to be fully interoperable.

Functional Safety Requirements have been identified to reduce the risk linked with the vehicles operating on the manoeuvring area.

The different Safety requirements, Assumptions and Issues identified during this safety impact assessment are listed in the safety log (See Annex 3).

8.2 Recommendations

1. The draft VCSII IR [16] be amended so as to clear safety Issue Iss001 identified in section 7. To address this safety issue, the following safety requirement will be added to the draft VCS II IR Annex 3:

Member States who convert frequency assignments to 8.33 kHz in any part of their airspace shall: (1) ensure that operators of aircraft flying in such airspace are informed that these aircraft must

be equipped with radio equipment with 8.33 kHz channel spacing

(2) perform a local safety assessment prior to the conversion that takes into account all the traffic expected to cross that airspace and the potential issues arising from the VCS in operation in all surrounding airspace.

2. The draft VCSII IR [16] be amended so as to clear safety Issue Iss002 identified in section 7. To address this safety issue, a new definition will be added to clarify that in this document by the term “radio” we refer to any electronic device designed to transmit and/or receive transmissions in the aeronautical mobile communications band.

3. The draft VCSII IR [16] be amended so as to clear safety Issue Iss003 identified in section 7. This safety issue is addressed by the new requirement to be added in the IR which is proposed in the resolution of issue 1 above.

8.3 How the draft IR is addressing the outcome of the safety impact

assessment

Annex 4 shows how the results of the safety assessment are addressed by the VCSII IR. The table, included in this annex, identifies three possibilities associated to the different Safety requirements:

• The SR is fully addressed by the present draft IR [16] and no action is necessary.

• The SR is not directly addressed by the present draft IR [16] but existing regulation (e.g. ICAO) might be sufficient to address this safety requirement. An action has been carried out by the IRDG and the drafting group decided that the situation is acceptable without modifying the IR VCSII IR Draft.

• The SR is not addressed by the present draft IR [16] and an IR modification is necessary. The proposal attached to this table will be included in the final VCSII IR Draft.

As indicated in this table, it has been shown that all Safety Requirements identified during this safety impact assessment have been satisfactorily addressed either by the draft VCS II IR [16] or by the future draft VCS II IR which will include the additional/modified requirements or by other existing regulations (e.g. ICAO).

ANNEX 1: GLOSSARY AND REFERENCES

A1-1 Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations

ACC Area Control Centre

A/G Air Ground

AIP Aeronautical Information Publication

ANS Air Navigation Service

ANSP Air Navigation Service Provider

AO Airline Operator

Arg Argument

ATAS Air Traffic Advisory Service

ATCO Air Traffic Controller

ATM Air Traffic Management

CAT Commercial Air Transportation

CND Cooperative Network Design

Comms Communications

FCI Future Communication Infrastructure

FL Flight Level

FHA Functional Hazard Assessment

FIS Flight Information Service

FDP Flight Data Processing

GSN Goal Structuring Notation

IFPS Integrated Initial Flight Plan Processing System

IR Implementing Rule

IRDG Implementing Rule Drafting Group

LoA Letter of Agreement

PSSA Preliminary System Safety Assessment

MILHAG Military Harmonisation Group

MoM Minutes of Meeting

NSA National Supervisory Authority

RE Requirement-Engineering

RT Radio Telephony

SAM Safety Assessment Methodology

SAR Safety Assessment Report

SCG Stakeholder Consultation Group

SES Single European Sky

SOP Standard Operating Procedure

SSR Safety Summary Report

SR Safety Requirements

ST Safety Target

VCS Voice Channel Spacing

A1-2 References

[1] Safety Assessment (FHA/PSSA) 8.33 kHz BELOW FL 195, (ACC Services), Edition 0.2, 31st March 2006

[2] Safety Assessment (FHA/PSSA) 8.33 kHz BELOW FL 195, Medium and Massive Scenario, Edition 1.1, 22nd November 2006

[3] Safety Assessment Report, 8.33 Below FL 195 in ICAO EUR Region, Edition 1.3, October 2008

SAFPLN-2009-0101-A Draft, dated 17/09/09

[5] Implementation of the 8.33 kHz Voice Channel Spacing below FL 195 - Initial Safety impact assessment-report for the interim phase , 8 33belowFL 195-SAFREP-2009-0101-D V0 1 08-03-10

[6] Implementation of the 8.33 kHz Voice Channel Spacing below FL 195 - Initial Safety impact assessment-report for the Final phase , 8 33 below FL 195-SAFREP-2009-0201-D V0 1 08-03-10

[7] Minutes of Meeting, Initial Safety Assessment for 8.33 kHz workshop, 30 July 2009

[8] Minutes of Meeting, Initial Safety Assessment for 8.33 kHz workshop, 16 December 2009

[9] Eurocontrol powerpoint presentation “Air-Ground Voice Com service 8.33 kHz below FL 195 - Initial Safety impact assessment – operational scenario 1“

[10] EUROCONTROL Air-Ground Communication Safety Study - Causes and Recommendations - DAP/SAF 2006-09, Edition 1.1

[11] EUROCONTROL, 2007, Air Navigation System Safety Assessment Methodology (SAM), SAF.ET1.ST03.1000-MAN-01, Edition 2.1

[12] REGULATORY APPROACH for the 2nd phase of the Air-Ground Voice Channel Spacing ( airspace below FL 195) draft V1.0 dated 07-05-10

[13] PSG3-WP3 “IR Draft Justification material” dated 11 October 2010

[14] ICAO annex 10 Volume III Communication Systems First Edition - July 1995

[15] ICAO EUR Doc 011 “EUR Frequency Management Manual” – (2009)

[16] draft VCS II IR – V10, this is the version distributed as Annex 4 to the Minutes of the 3rd meeting of the 8.33 Programme Steering Group (PSG).

[17] ETSI EN 300 676 V1.3.1 (2003-03) Electromagnetic compatibility and Radio spectrum Matters (ERM); Ground Based VHF hand-held, mobile and fixed radio transmitters, receivers and transceivers for the VHF aeronautical mobile service using amplitude modulation; Technical characteristics and methods of measurements.

[18] EUROCAE ED-23B (March 1995) and Amendments No 1, 2 and 3: Minimum operational performance specification for airborne VHF receiver-transmitter operating in the frequency range 117.975-136.975 MHz

[19] ESARR 4- Risk Assessment and Mitigation in ATM- V 1.0 (05-04-2001)

[20] ICAO Annex 11 “Air Traffic Services” -2001-

[21] ICAO Doc 9476 “Manual of Surface Movement Guidance and Control Systems (SMGCS)” -1986-

[22] ICAO Doc 9184 Part I “Airport planning Manual” -1987-

[23] ICAO Doc 9137 Part 8 “Airport service manual” -1983-

ANNEX 2: AIR TRAFFIC SERVICES SUPPORTED BY THE A/G