International Civil Aviation Organization

Transcription

1 International Civil Aviation Organization INFORMATION PAPER 05 August 2016 ENGLISH ONLY Agenda item 7 ICAO/IMO JOINT WORKING GROUP ON HARMONIZATION OF AERONAUTICAL AND MARITIME SEARCH AND RESCUE (ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR) TWENTY-THIRD MEETING BERLIN, GERMANY, 12 to 16 September 2016 SAR COMMUNICATIONS Report on Cospas-Sarsat System status, operations and future developments Presented by Cospas-Sarsat SUMMARY Executive summary: This document provides information on the status of the International Cospas-Sarsat Programme as at 14 August 2016 Action to be taken: Paragraph 31 System Operation 1 In 2015, based on preliminary information, Cospas-Sarsat alert data assisted in 718 distress incidents (685 in 2014) and 2,185 persons were rescued (2,354 in 2014). Since September 1982, the Cospas-Sarsat System has provided assistance in rescuing at least 41,750 persons in 11,788 SAR events. 2 The geographic distribution of all reported SAR events for which Cospas-Sarsat alert data was used in 2015 is presented in Figure 1 and the distribution of all SAR events (maritime, aviation and PLB) for the period from January to December 2015 is shown at Figure 2. Participants often provide recent SAR cases supported by Cospas-Sarsat for publication on the Cospas-Sarsat webpage and Facebook page; ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR participants are invited to monitor and contribute to this page.

2 - 2 - Figure 1: 2015 Geographic distribution of SAR events Figure 2: Type of SAR events (Jan. Dec. 2014) 3 Based on the data provided by participants, Cospas-Sarsat calculates two false alert rates, identified for convenience as the "SAR false alert rate" and the "beacon false alert rate". The SAR false alert rate, which characterises the impact of false alerts on SAR services, is the percentage of false alerts plus undetermined alerts (no person in distress found; no beacon found) over the total number of alerts transmitted to SAR authorities. Table 1 below shows the evolution of the false alert rate computed from a SAR perspective. Table 2 below shows the evolution of the 406 MHz beacon false alert rate (ratio of false plus undetermined alerts over the beacon population) since In 2015, the false alert rate was 96.3%, i.e. about one real alert in 27 alerts received. Year Rate Year EPIRBs ELTs PLBs % % 5.3% 0.6% % % 4.9% 0.4% % % 5.0% 0.4% % % 4.5% 0.4% % % 4.2% 0.4% Table 1: SAR false alert rate Table 2: 406 MHz beacon false alert rate 4 Figure 3 shows the number of SAR events and persons rescued with the assistance of Cospas-Sarsat alert data for the period from January 1994 to December 2015.

3 MHz Beacons Figure 3: of SAR Events and persons rescued with the assistance of Cospas-Sarsat alert data (January 1994 to December 2015) 5 Based on estimates made by Administrations using a formula based on beacons registered modified by a calculated registration rate, there were just over 2 million (2,000,538) beacons operating at 406 MHz in use worldwide at the end of 2015, up 12.4% from 2014, a statistically normal growth rate. The ratio of production of beacons capable of acquiring position data from radio navigation satellites (such as GPS and Glonass) and encoding this position information into the transmitted alert data ("location protocol beacons") has increased from 66.7% in 2014 to 70.5% in A performance measure instituted by Cospas-Sarsat in 2009 assesses "percentage of detected beacons that are registered". This data is shown in Table 3.

4 - 4 - Year EPIRB ELT PLB Totals of beacons registered / of detections (%) of beacons registered / of detections (%) of beacons registered / of detections (%) of beacons registered / of detections (%) ,879 / 6, ,631 / 10, / ,000 / 18, ,136 / 6, ,573 / 10, / 1, ,658 / 17, ,879 / 6, / 10, / ,000 / 18, ,833 / 6, ,007 / 10, ,179 / 1, ,129 / 18, ,672 / 7, ,606 /11, ,363 / 1, ,632 / 120, Table 3: age of detected beacons that are registered ( ) 7 Cospas-Sarsat operates the International 406 MHz Beacon Registration Database (IBRD, which is freely available to users with no access to national registration facilities. By allowing their beacon users to register beacons in the IBRD, Administrations help to facilitate proper registration by beacon owners while avoiding administrative costs and inconvenience to their governments. Administrations may also avail themselves of the facility to upload their national beacon registration data to the IBRD to ensure that it is available 24/7 to other SAR services when they receive alerts from active beacons in their SAR area of responsibility. As at 1st August 2016, there were 63,430 beacons registered in the IBRD (51,788 at 1st August 2016) from 138 Administrations. On average 667 SAR users per month ( , , ) log into the IBRD to search for beacon registration information. 8 Cospas-Sarsat plans to redesign the IBRD in 2017 and would appreciate comments from experts on possible improvements and added functionality that might be useful to them. The matter will be discussed in detail at the 30th Meeting of the Cospas-Sarsat Joint Committee, to be held in Montreal, September New IBRD specifications are targeted at: o a user interface that is easier to understand and navigate, o accommodation of the hexadecimal identification system for next-generation beacons, o accommodation of combined-device identifications (being able to associate the 406 MHz beacon identification with an AIS identification or a satellite communicator identification, o allowing the entry of more information about emergency contacts and voyage/flight/trekking plans, o identification of temporary users (beacons borrowed or rented), o allowing entry of photos of vessels/aircraft.

5 - 5 - The LEOSAR and GEOSAR Systems 9 As of 12 August 2016, five LEOSAR and seven GEOSAR spacecraft were in operation, supported by 55 LEOLUTs, 22 GEOLUTs and 30 MCCs. 10 Full details of the operational space and ground segments are available on the Cospas-Sarsat website ( Performance Measurement: Cospas-Sarsat Assisted SAR Events 11 As part of its Quality Management System, and to meet the goals and objectives of its strategic plan, Cospas-Sarsat developed a set of performance measures. Because the purpose of Cospas-Sarsat is to assist in the saving of lives, a performance measure of the evolution of the number of SAR events annually where Cospas-Sarsat assisted and provided the only alert was developed to evaluate the relevance of the System. Figure 4 provides twenty-five years of data and clearly indicates the continued relevance of the Cospas-Sarsat System. Figure 4: Annual of SAR Events where Cospas-Sarsat assisted or provided the only alert ( )

6 - 6 - SPOC Communication 12 As a result of actions taken to address the matter of non-responsive SPOCs, Cospas-Sarsat started in 2008 regular testing of MCC/SPOC communications. COMSAR 13 requested Cospas- Sarsat to report on these MCC/SPOC communication tests. The following information is a summary of results for the period October 2008 to August For that period, 20 of 31 operational MCCs reported results of MCC/SPOC communication tests results (some MCCs do not support SPOCs outside of their country and therefore are not required to conduct these tests). A total of 14,619 unique tests have been conducted to date. (2012) (2013) (2014) (2015) (2015) (2016) (2016) of SPOCs tested by MCCs Non-responsive SPOCs (no acknowledgements) SPOCs with less than 20% successful tests SPOCs with successful tests between 20% and 50% 73.3% 73.3% 72.9% 172/ % 173/ % 10.1% 8.7% 11.0% % % 4.7% 6.2% 3.5% 4 2.3% 4 2.3% 9.5% 8.1% 8.1% 8 4.7% % % insufficiently responsive 24.3% 23% 22.6% 19.8% 20.8% Table 4: SPOC Communication test results ( August 2016) 13 For the purpose of these statistics, a success means that the requested positive feedback (not an automatic acknowledgement) was received from the SPOC. Non-responsive SPOCs were those SPOCs which did not provide any response. When available, several communication links (e.g., AFTN, Fax, Phone, , FTP, Telex, X.25) were tested each month. In many cases, each available link was tested separately and counted as a unique test. The list of non-responsive SPOCs is provided in Table 5.

7 - 7 - Non-Responsive SPOCs Rarely Responsive SPOCs SPOCs with Low Success Ratio (No response to tests) (Less than 20% successful tests) (Between 20 and 50% successful tests) Ascension Island (A) Cape Verde (A) Azerbaijani Rep (M) Benin (A) Ghana (A) Bolivia (A) Cameroon (A) Mauritania (A?) Côte d Ivoire (A) Central African Republic (A) Senegal (A?) Ethiopia (A) Chad (A?) Congo (Republic of the) (A) Djbouti (A) Equatorial Guinea (A) Eritrea (A) Gabonese Republic (A?) Guinea (Rep of) (A) Guinea-Bissau (A) Liberia (A) Mali (A) Sao Tome and Principe (?) Sierra Leone (A) Tajikistan (A?) Gambia (A) Hungary (A) Kyrgyz Rep (A) Moldova (A) Palestine (M) Romania (A?) Somalia (Rep of) (A) Sudan (Rep of) (A) Suriname (A) Turkmenistan (M) Togolese Rep. (A?) Note: (A) aviation SPOC; (M) maritime SPOC; (?) uncertain; bold indicates new to category Table 5: 2016 List of non-responsive SPOCs (based on results provided through August 2016) 14 Available results show that in 2016 some improvements continue to be noted in the number of SPOCs that are insufficiently responsive or non-responsive to communication tests. Currently about 20% of SPOCs remain insufficiently responsive, as compared to 25% in previous years. 15 The South Africa MCC has confirmed concerted efforts to improve communications with SPOCs in Angola (A), Botswana (M), Burundi (M), Lesotho (M), Malawi (A), Rwanda (A) and Zambia (A), and has had impressive positive results. All of these SPOCs have moved from the non-responsive or rarely responsive category to being 100% responsive. Unfortunately this improvement in the African region is offset by a number of new SPOCs being listed in the low-success ratio category (Table 2). 16 In addition, some MCCs have reported that the testing has allowed them to maintain better relations with their SPOCs, which can improve working efficiency when an actual distress alert is sent to a SPOC that has rare experience managing one. 17 To begin to address the issue of poor SPOC communications, the Cospas-Sarsat and ICAO Secretariats jointly developed a draft model agreement for use by MCCs and their SPOCs, based on existing agreements provided by some MCC operators. The agreement was reviewed by the ICAO/IMO JWG at its 22nd meeting in September 2015 and the Joint Committee at its 29th meeting, and was approved by the Council at the CSC-55 Session. The model agreement can be

8 - 8 - found on the Cospas-Sarsat website ( On 28 June 2016, the first MCC/SPOC agreement based on the model was signed between the Italian MCC and Serbia SPOC. System Enhancements 18 Future enhancements to System operations continue to focus primarily on development of technical specifications for second-generation beacons (SGBs) and the next-generation space system, MEOSAR. Task Group meetings on SGBs and MEOSAR were held in April and June 2016, respectively, but their work has not yet been reviewed by the Thirtieth Meeting of the Joint Committee, which will be held from 18 to 27 September 2016 in Montreal. Therefore there is no recent technical work that can be currently reported upon. 19 The MEOSAR system should attain Full Operating Capability (FOC) in 2018, with the anticipated availability of enhanced second generation 406 MHz Distress Beacons (SGB) shortly before or after MEOSAR FOC. MEOSAR will be backward compatible with current generation (document C/S T.001 compliant) beacons; however the SGB design is optimized for the MEOSAR system and will provide improved detection, a return link service, and enhanced data fields. 20 Cospas-Sarsat has been working in close consultation with ICAO on the development of the Concept of Operations for the GADSS (Global Aeronautical Distress and Safety System), including considerations on providing an independent location for fast moving beacons. 21 Cospas-Sarsat is committed to the timely development of specifications for emergency locator transmitters for distress tracking (ELT-DTs) to meet ICAO mandates for 4-dimensional (location plus time) data at least as frequently as once per minute for aircraft in distress. The development of these specifications will be a matter of priority at the Cospas-Sarsat Joint Committee meeting scheduled September As a separate but related matter, both ICAO and the International Maritime Organization have expressed interest in Cospas-Sarsat considering making its ground data-distribution system available for alerts originating through the Global Aeronautical Distress and Safety System (GADSS) and Global Maritime Distress and safety System (GMDSS), even when those alerts do not originate from a Cospas-Sarsat-specified 406 MHz beacon. Additionally, ICAO is exploring the use of a data repository as a single source of SAR information during a distress incident, and has invited Cospas-Sarsat to consider hosting this facility, dependent on its future design and definition. Status of the MEOSAR System Development 23 MEOSAR development continues, and the Council at the CSC-55 meeting in December 2015, decided to begin MEOSAR EOC (early operational capability) transition, with an EOC declaration possible at the next Council session in December The initial commissioning of the MEOLUTs and MCCs with the capability to merge MEOSAR data with LEOSAR and GEOSAR data began in July Results will be considered at the JC-30 Meeting in September 2016.

9 - 9 - Figure 5: The MEOSAR System Concept 24 MEOSAR EOC is expected to begin in late 2016 and the transition to MEOSAR IOC (initial operational capability) will begin in MEOSAR FOC (full operational capability) cannot be declared until enough commissioned MEOSAR satellites and ground stations are available to provide global coverage; current plans indicate FOC will be attained in The Council will formally advise stakeholders, including ICAO and IMO, on transitions to operational configurations as future decisions are made. 25 The new MEOSAR system will bring many advantages to the Cospas-Sarsat system including faster detection of beacons and earlier provision of location. One of the challenges of adding MEOSAR to the Cospas-Sarsat system has been the integration of MEOSAR with the existing LEOSAR and GEOSAR system. 26 The current model of EOC consists of legacy MCCs having only capability for LEOSAR and GEOSAR data ("LG MCCs") and MCCs capable of also managing MEOSAR data ("LGM MCCs") working together during EOC. An LGM MCC will merge data from LEOSAR, GEOSAR and MEOSAR detections. For example, a LEOSAR initial detection with A and B positions could be confirmed by a later MEOSAR detection by an LGM MCC. An LGM MCC that needs to send a MEOSAR alert to an LG MCC will send the alert in Cospas-Sarsat SIT 915 format, a plain text format. The body of the SIT 915 will contain the MEOSAR data in SIT 185 format (plain text SPOC-type message). This temporary workaround, until such time as all MCCs are fully converted to LGM MCCs, will need to be kept in mind by SAR operators.

10 A new draft of document C/S G.007, "Handbook on Distress Alert Messages for Rescue Coordination Centres (RCCs), Search and Rescue Point of Contacts (SPOCs) and IMO Ship Security Competent Authorities", to include the MEOSAR system, will be considered at the JC- 30 Meeting and its publication is expected after Council approval in December ICAO has indicated that the final version of document C/S G.007 will be translated into the six official languages of ICAO and published as a circular. 28 The following table depicts the MEOSAR satellite constellation as at August 2016, including planned future launches: Figure 6: MEOSAR satellite constellations Notes: SAR/Galileo: The first 26 Galileo satellites carrying a total of 24 SAR instrument are planned to be deployed between 2012 and SAR/Glonass-K: SAR instruments planned to be carried on the Russian GNSS Glonass-K1 and Glonass-K2 satellites. According to the current launch plans, in total eight SAR payloads aboard Glonass-K navigational satellites will be available at the end of SAR/GPS: The first launch-ready date is After this first launch, a GPS constellation of 24 satellites with SAR instruments should be in place within 10 years. 29 The following have either implemented or announced the planned implementation of an operational MEOSAR ground segment (MEOLUT and/or MEOSAR MCC): Algeria, Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China (P.R. of), Cyprus, France, Greece, Hong Kong, China, India, Indonesia, Italy, ITDC, Japan, Korea (Rep. of), New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, Peru, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, Thailand, Turkey, UAE, UK, USA and Viet Nam. 30 If time permits, a presentation on the current status and principles of operation of the MEOSAR system can be provided. Action requested of the JWG 31 The JWG is invited to note the information provided on the status of the Cospas-Sarsat Programme and comment on future developments of the System, as appropriate.