REPORT OF THE SIXTEENTH SESSION OF THE ICAO/IMO JOINT WORKING GROUP ON HARMONIZATION OF AERONAUTICAL AND MARITIME SEARCH AND RESCUE

Transcription

1 REPORT OF THE SIXTEENTH SESSION OF THE ICAO/IMO JOINT WORKING GROUP ON HARMONIZATION OF AERONAUTICAL AND MARITIME SEARCH AND RESCUE Anglesey, Wales, United Kingdom 28 September to 2 October AGENDA ITEM 1 - ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 1.1 As endorsed by MSC 86 and by the ICAO Secretariat, the Sixteenth Meeting of the International Civil Aviation Organization/International Maritime Organization (ICAO/IMO) Joint Working Group (JWG) on the Harmonization of Aeronautical and Maritime Search and Rescue was held at RAF Valley, Anglesey, Wales, United Kingdom, from 28 September to 2 October The meeting was opened by the chairman (Mr. D. Edwards) on Monday, 28 September 2009, at 1000 hours. A welcome was extended to all members and observers by Group Captain Jonathan Dixon, RAF Search and Rescue Force Commander, RAF Valley. Group Captain Dixon welcomed the JWG to RAF Valley and stressed the benefit of international cooperation in doing all that can be done to rescue those in peril. 1.3 The chairman opened the meeting by dedicating this 16 th Session of the JWG to the memory of Mr. Urban Hallberg, a principal founder of the JWG who had recently passed away. The chairman remarked that Urban was known to many members as a visionary and initiator of many SAR service planning initiatives whose energetic input to the SAR discipline over many years had been of outstanding value. A response was made by the Swedish maritime member, Mr. Christer Waldregren, who spoke of Urban s huge input to SAR at large and, particularly, to aviation and maritime SAR cooperation and harmonization. 1.4 The chairman noted that the meeting still lacked a vice chairman and that this position required an aviation SAR member as a counterbalance to the maritime expertise presently in the chair. Aviation members were invited to give thought throughout the meeting to a nomination. 1.5 The chairman reminded the members and observers of the mandate, nature and operating procedures of the JWG and extended a warm welcome to new members. 1.6 The members and observers who participated in the JWG 16 meeting are listed in Appendix A. 1.7 The Group adopted the provisional agenda as given in Appendix B. 1.8 The terms of reference are contained in Appendix C.

2 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD AGENDA ITEM 2 - DECISIONS OF ICAO AND IMO BODIES RELATED TO THE JOINT WORKING GROUP WORK 2.1 Briefing on the outcome of COMSAR 13 and MSC 85 and The representative of the IMO Secretariat, Mr. Hans van der Graaf, introduced document ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16-WP.1 providing information on the Outcome of COMSAR 13 and MSC 85 and 86 with respect to SAR matters relevant to the Group. The JWG noted that:.1 MSC 85 had approved amendments to the IAMSAR Manual, prepared by JWG 14 and endorsed by COMSAR 12, for dissemination by means of MSC.1/Circ.1289 and decided that the approved amendments should become applicable on 1 June 2009;.2 COMSAR 13 had considered sections 3, 4 and 7 and appendices F, G and H to the report of JWG 15, prepared draft proposed amendments to the IAMSAR Manual and endorsed the draft MSC circular on adoption of amendments to the Manual for submission to MSC 86 for approval and to become applicable on [1 June 2010];.3 MSC 86 had approved amendments to the IAMSAR Manual, prepared by JWG 15 and endorsed by COMSAR 13, for dissemination by means of MSC.1/Circ.1311 and decided that the approved amendments should become applicable on 1 June 2010;.4 MSC 85 had agreed to maintain the current policy of the Organization regarding publications and did not agree to make the publication of amendments to the IAMSAR Manual freely available on the Internet, noting that the amendments to the IAMSAR Manual would be circulated by MSC circulars and their text would be available on IMO s documents site;.5 MSC 85 had further agreed to establish a more structured amendment process for the IAMSAR Manual based on the general principles agreed to by COMSAR 12 (document COMSAR 12/15, annex 6);.6 MSC 85 had noted that there was a need for a major update and restructuring of the IAMSAR Manual and had endorsed the establishment of the Editorial Group, including its terms of reference; and.7 MSC 86 had approved draft amendments to the Technical specifications for communications within the LRIT system and to the Protocols, as well as the required consequential amendments to MSC.1/Circ.1297 prepared by the Ad Hoc LRIT Working Group and agreed that SAR services should be able to request and receive LRIT information in case other than those specified in regulation V/ and further agreed to decide, at its next session, the date as from which the above-mentioned amendments should be implemented The chairman emphasised the importance of JWG making explicit recommendations to subsequent meetings of COMSAR and MSC and urged JWG members to make input from the level of SAR operatives.

3 - 3 - ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD 2.2 Briefing on ICAO activities in The representative of the ICAO Secretariat, Mr. Brian Day, introduced document ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16-WP.19 providing information on the year s activities of ICAO that included reference to: a) a decision by the ICAO Secretariat management, after strong representation of the inadequacy of the Secretariat s SAR Human Resources, to recruit a SAR expert on a short-term contract for six months with effect from 5 October Mr. Mike Barton, RCC Chief, RCC Australia, had been selected to fill that position. Mr. Day will continue to make part time input as the formal SAR Consultant to ICAO. There has been a change in Secretariat governance that is resulting in a change in functional emphasis that gives prospect of the important issues confronting SAR being given more timely and effective attention by ICAO; b) a recent shortcoming of the USOAP audit program as far as SAR is concerned because of there being no SAR Technical Officer permanently employed in the Secretariat whereby some State representatives have reported inappropriate emphases and questionable assertions by auditors about State SAR arrangements. These reported shortcomings are expected to be soon resolved by internal discussion within the Secretariat and, as appropriate, amendment to audit protocols once the planned contract of the new SAR expert commences; c) the continuing meetings of the ICAO Unmanned Aircraft System Study Group (UASSG) which has relevance to SAR services with particular respect to their use as: 1) possible alternatives to long range aircraft as detailed in the ICAO Regional Air Navigation Plans; 2) platforms for the aerial delivery of life support equipment; and 3) electronic search vehicles. d) matters still to be addressed by the group include the need to develop procedures for SAR actions directed to locating downed unmanned aircraft. No proposals for amendment of Annex 12 have so far been forthcoming from the Study Group. Close interaction between the Study Group s leader and the SAR technical personnel is planned over coming months; e) the recommendation from JWG 15 that ICAO advise Cospas-Sarsat that in the case of aeronautical emergencies, any MCC not able to deliver a distress alert to a responsible SPOC should consider contacting the control tower of an international airport in the country concerned. This recommendation caused some concern within the Secretariat. IMO, the C-S Secretariat and the C-S Joint Committee subsequently developed a modified procedure that is reported upon in full in WP 13 to this JWG: Information of interest to SPOCs/RCCs, paragraphs 5 and 6, with which ICAO is in agreement; f) an approach made by southern African States to ICAO and IMO for assistance with implementation of a policy of sub-regionalisation of joint aviation / maritime SAR services that has been consensually agreed by the States concerned. A comprehensive proposal for a sub-programme under the auspices of COSCAP has been developed, as have performance objectives, time lines, and a program for a regional workshop;

4 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD Cospas-Sarsat g) ICAO plans to cooperate with the General Civil Aviation Authority (GCAA) of UAE in convening a global civil aviation SAR conference in Abu Dhabi, UAE, in June, The conference will address the theme of future organisation of global SAR services in the light of on-going consolidation of air navigation services, emerging technology and necessary cost-efficiencies and is recommended to State Administrations and stakeholder service providers as being timely and relevant; h) the likelihood that it will be some time before many search aircraft are equipped with 406 MHz homing capability due to its high cost, and the concern of JWG 15 that all 406 MHz beacons should be equipped with a MHz homing frequency. The relevant Standard in Annex 10, Volume III, part 2, Chapter 5 states that: 1) From 1 January 2005, emergency locator transmitters shall operate on 406 MHz and MHz simultaneously; and 2) All emergency locator transmitters installed on or after 1 January 2002 shall operate simultaneously on 406 MHz and MHz. i) the consideration of JWG 15 that new types of distress alert units that do not comply with specifications of ICAO, IMO or Cospas-Sarsat should be the subject of guidance material being developed by ICAO and IMO with respect to their impact on the effectiveness and integrity of States SAR services. ICAO has taken this matter no further but plans to do so over coming months; j) the query of JWG 15 concerning the continuing appropriateness of the Cospas-Sarsat criterion that 95 per cent of Doppler-derived crash locations should be accurate to within 5 km and its recommendation that ICAO and IMO join the Cospas-Sarsat Secretariat in re-assessing it. ICAO has not advanced this matter but plans to do so over coming months; and k) the recommendation of JWG 15 that the Cospas-Sarsat document Handbook on Distress Alert Messages for Rescue Coordination Centres (RCCs), Search and Rescue Points of Contact (SPOCs) and IMO Ship Security Competent Authorities should be included in the list of documents required to be held by Rescue Coordination Centres. This matter has not been addressed but, again, is listed for early attention The JWG discussed ICAO auditors findings that were based on Annex 12 Recommended Practices, particularly those with respect to establishment of joint RCCs, and States confusion about recommendations from auditors that States should commission Local User Terminals (LUT) and other facilities thought by the States not to be necessary. Input from the Cospas-Sarsat Secretariat indicated that there was risk of over-servicing resulting from such findings. The Cospas-Sarsat observer offered the services of Cospas-Sarsat to review the USOAP audit material so as to eliminate this confusion. It was noted that States should carefully consider if they need to procure a LUT if coverage of their area is already provided by another LUT. With the system now using only 406 MHz distress beacons, there needs to be strong focus on meeting Cospas-Sarsat requirements for delivery of Cospas-Sarsat distress alerts to a State. These requirements include establishing: reliable communication links with the supporting MCC, including providing full address/ /telephone/fax contact information for the State s designated SAR Point of Contact (SPOC); appropriate regulations for the use of 406 MHz beacons within the State; and,

5 - 5 - ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD a beacon register with a 24-hour point of contact for 406 MHz beacon data or authorizing, establishing and notifying access to the Cospas-Sarsat International Beacon Registration Database (IBRD). Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) The chairman requested feedback to the JWG after the scheduled UASSG meeting in Montreal in September with respect to unmanned aircraft involvement in SAR operations The JWG noted that there was a widespread need for education and awareness of the capabilities and operating procedures of UAS. Some on-going concerns are the potential mix of unmanned aircraft and manned aircraft within confined airspace. Airspace management, including imposition of restricted areas, is a real issue The Australian member reported that an Australian Border Protection trial had been successful in indicating the prospect of integration of unmanned and manned aircraft through application of sensor equipment and remote voice communications as tools for aircraft separation. Sensors may also be used to detect recently implanted targets over sea and land. Time-on-task of unmanned aircraft is another consideration taking into account their prolonged loiter capacity. 3. AGENDA ITEM 3 - CONVENTIONS, PLANS, MANUALS AND OTHER DOCUMENTS AFFECTING SAR Proposed amendments to the IAMSAR Manual 3.1 The JWG noted document ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16-WP.6 (Australia), Amendments to the IAMSAR Manual, including making it more usable by training institutions that proposed amendments to the IAMSAR Manual as a consequence of the introduction of Long Range Identification and Tracking (LRIT) on 1 July 2009, the cessation of MHz processing by Cospas-Sarsat on 1 February 2009 and the retirement of Inmarsat A and E services. The proposal included suggested amendments to Volumes I, II and III. 3.2 Discussion ensued and a final proposal was drafted. 3.3 The proposed amendment as agreed upon is given at Appendix D. Recommendation 16/1: that the proposed amendments at Appendix D should be made to Volumes I, II and III of the IAMSAR Manual. 3.4 The JWG noted document ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16-WP.7 (United States), Amendments to IAMSAR Manual - Volume III, regarding communications proposing amendments to the IAMSAR Manual as a consequence of the full implementation of the Global Maritime Distress and Safety System and the termination by the Cospas-Sarsat system of its satellite monitoring of MHz signals from distress beacons. The paper listed a number of aspects of communications equipment and procedures that required discussion and decisions with respect to their reference in the IAMSAR Manual. Specific amendments were proposed with respect to Volume III and it was proposed that as an outcome of discussions on the listed issues, subsequent amendments would be made to Volumes I and II. 3.5 Discussion ensued with respect to 500 khz as a distress frequency and it was agreed that because ITU no longer recognizes 500 khz as a distress frequency and it is no longer in general use for that purpose, reference to it should be deleted. The frequency is still being pursued for retention by the

6 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD maritime industry for other applications. 3.6 It was noted that VHF EPIRBs on channel 70 are still an IMO Standard and may be used even though there are no known marketable devices. It was agreed, therefore, that reference to it in the IAMSAR Manual should be retained MHz distress beacons, although no longer monitored by the Cospas-Sarsat satellite system, are still in use by many craft. It was agreed that reference to them in the IAMSAR Manual should be retained and that the term distress beacon as the descriptor should also be retained. 3.8 The JWG accepted that the proposed amendment should be included in the IAMSAR Manual and noted that there may be a need for some editorial refinement of the proposed amendment. The ICAO Secretariat and the United States maritime member agreed to coordinate that work in the short term. It was agreed that there is scope for restructuring Volume II with respect to references to distress beacons and, in particular, PLBs that are not the subject of a mandated carriage requirement. It was agreed that this requirement will be referred to the Editorial Group for consideration. 3.9 The proposed amendment as agreed upon is given at Appendix E. Recommendation 16/2: that the proposed amendments at Appendix E should be made to Volume III of the IAMSAR Manual. Review of MSC/Circ.751 Special needs of high speed craft (HSC) 3.12 The JWG noted document ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16-WP.5 (IMO), Review of MSC/Circ.751 Special needs of high speed craft (HSC) that sought JWG comment on MSC/Circ.751 concerning special needs of high speed craft (that is considered in need of review or deletion) The JWG was of the opinion that there is no need for the retention of the circular. The special needs of HSC are provided for elsewhere and it is considered that there is sufficient guidance material extant. Recommendation 16/3: that IMO should be advised that the JWG is of the opinion that MSC Circ.751 should be revoked, there being sufficient consideration of HSC matters in more permanent documents. Updating and restructuring of the IAMSAR Manual 3.14 The JWG noted document ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16-WP.10 (Coordinator, Editorial Group), IAMSAR Manual Editorial Group matters with respect to the editorial work to be done on the IAMSAR Manual. In accordance with a decision of JWG 15, that the Editorial Group would not write the amendments to the Manual but would identify the general areas to be addressed, the paper updated JWG members with proposals to date, and in particular: Annex 1, General Principles and Structured Amendment Process for the IAMSAR Manual, which comprised guidance material endorsed at IMO s COMSAR 12 meeting. The Coordinator explained that this guidance provides an outline of the way forward but

7 - 7 - ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD is subject to review. In particular, the proposal for a period of two years between editions is subject to further consideration by all parties; Annex 2, Outline structure for updated and restructured IAMSAR Manual [Volumes I and II] which provides comments regarding textual amendment and the Manual references where it is proposed to be made. These comments support the notion that massive restructuring of the Manual is not required but that there are several specific areas which need review, further discussion, and updating; Annex 3, Draft IMO/ICAO/JWG policies and practices for the IAMSAR Manual (2009) which provides an initial compilation of current ICAO, IMO and JWG policies and practices for the management of the IAMSAR Manual, and ideas for an amendment process. This material is intended to provide a common basis of understanding to guide JWG discussions. The Coordinator explained that consideration should be given to refining this annex into a more formal document for future reference in IAMSAR Manual administrative work; and Annex 4, Draft IAMSAR Manual writing guide which is intended to support efforts to write text for the IAMSAR Manual. The Coordinator explained that this should be helpful guidance for the JWG, and some consideration should be given to how this core of guidance material should be maintained A suggestion was made that an estimate of the time to complete each specific task associated with the Manual revision should be required in the administering documentation Most discussion centered on the content of: Annex 2 of WP/10 and, in particular, with reference to proposals for revision of material in all three Volumes. Volume I the United States maritime member gave notice that the U.S. would submit a WP to JWG 17 regarding the need to include more information on land SAR in the IAMSAR Manual. Advice was given that care is required in input of land SAR data to the IAMSAR Manual in as much as land SAR involves many subsets of expertise including Urban SAR which fall outside the appropriate ICAO/IMO framework of reference. In conclusion, the JWG agreed that there should be sufficient land SAR material included to allow ARCC staff to fully meet their responsibilities and to give them an effective understanding of specialist land SAR procedures. Some members suggested that land SAR content might be best incorporated in IAMSAR Volume IV, that is the State s own manual of local procedures; the Australian aeronautical member advised that Australia has included all of land SAR, aeronautical SAR and maritime SAR information in its National SAR Manual; and The JWG agreed that there is no need for amendment of material regarding Mass Rescue Operations.

8 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD Volume II An updated version of Annex 2 to WP/10 showing JWG proposals for Manual sections in need of review is included at Appendix G Volume III The JWG agreed on the need to give early attention to Volume III to provide an update to operators as soon as possible; and In that regard, the JWG noted that the editorial group had developed a questionnaire that was targeted at users of Volume III. Users responses included advice that: 95 per cent of respondents had consulted the Manual; the Manual was used, for the most part, for education only few users had used it in live SAR actions; most users are satisfied with the Manual s construction although there was some comment on it being too complicated and containing too much text; the Manual contained appropriate information for managing SAR actions; there was some information missing, for example, there is no mention of piracy; the Manual should have a better content list and specific text for education purposes; and 40 per cent considered that Volume III should be updated; 60 per cent considered it did not need to be updated. Suggestions for changes to the Manual included: bright colours to help location of required text, quick reference list or checklist, colour coding and alphabetical indexing, more information on piracy, coloured illustrations, split aeronautical/maritime sections On the basis of these user responses, the Editorial Group decided that changes to prepare a section containing easily accessed checklists related to most-likely scenarios is a priority. It was further decided by the Editorial Group that most of the information already in Volume III should remain for educational purposes and to supplement the checklists The JWG discussed the adequacy of existing information on piracy in Volumes II and III of the Manual and generally agreed that RCCs are well placed to act as relay stations for messages concerning piracy but that the actual implementation of anti-piracy measures is a different discipline to the provision of SAR services and that the input of piracy information to the IAMSAR Manual should be discreetly governed in consideration of this principle The JWG noted that Volume III is used, for the most part, on flight decks and bridges and the JWG agreed that it should be a user friendly Manual in a quick reference format that used tabs, check lists and easily interpreted graphics in lieu of text wherever possible.

9 - 9 - ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD Annex JWG attention was then focused on Annex 3 to WP10, Draft IMO/ICAO/JWG Policies and Practices for the IAMSAR Manual. This is a discussion document for the guidance of members of the Editorial Group and will be refined over time, after negotiation between ICAO and IMO and with experience. Eventually it is planned that Annex 3 will be combined with Annex 1 General principles and structured amendment process for the IAMSAR Manual It was agreed that the section relating to intellectual property should read: ICAO or IMO permission is needed to reproduce the IAMSAR Manual and can be expected in the case of extracts for operational and training use. Annex Consideration was then given to Annex 4: Draft IAMSAR Manual writing guide which is meant as guidance material to the Editorial Group. This, like Annex 3, will be refined over time by the JWG It was agreed that with respect to the Manual amendment process, proposed amendments would emanate from the Editorial Group in redline/strikeout format. The suggested option for JWG to use ICAO/IMO electronic files and make amendments in track changes was negated It was agreed that the Manual text should be written to the level of a second language English speaker/listener. Recommendation 16/4:.1 that the documents identified as Annexes 1, 3 and 4 in WP.10 should be retained, refined as necessary in the light of experience and negotiations between ICAO, IMO and the JWG Editorial Group, and used as guidelines in the project to revise the IAMSAR Manual;.2 that Annexes 1 and 3 should be ultimately combined into a single document; and.3 that ICAO and IMO endorse the proposed outline structure for the updated and restructured IAMSAR Manual as given in Appendix F and instruct the JWG and in particular its Editorial Group to conduct the work, giving early attention to Volume III and taking into account proposals for amendments submitted by IMO Member States and ICAO Contracting States The JWG noted document ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16-WP.18 (ICAO Secretariat), Interim ICAO input to IAMSAR Manual Editorial Group strategy, with respect to the work being done by the IAMSAR Manual Editorial Group. The paper recognised that there had been little opportunity for the ICAO Secretariat to correspond with the group during the past year and expressed the support of ICAO for the work. The paper offered some further input with respect to updated ICAO policies and preferences concerning the subject matter of the annexes of WP 10. Availability and amendment of the IAMSAR Manual 3.18 The JWG noted document ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16-WP.2 (IMO), Availability and amendment of the IAMSAR Manual, with respect to the consideration given by IMO to the strong opinion of JWG 14 that the IAMSAR Manual should be made freely available to all users and interested parties, and also to the suggestion of JWG 14 that there is merit in delegation of approval of amendments

10 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD by IMO's Maritime Safety Committee The JWG noted that the MSC agreed to establish a more structured amendment process for the IAMSAR Manual based on the general principles agreed to by COMSAR 12. At the same time, the JWG noted that the Committee agreed to maintain the current policy of the Organization regarding publications and did not agree to make the publication of amendments to the IAMSAR Manual freely available on the Internet, noting that the amendments to the IAMSAR would be circulated by MSC circulars and their text would be available on IMO s document site The JWG noted that the mechanics of the ICAO and IMO cooperative production of the Manual are complex, made especially so by the need for translation into six languages, different internal processes and programs within the respective Secretariats and, not least, their different costing policies The JWG noted that with respect to Manual amendments, present ICAO policy parallels that of IMO in as much as purchasers of the Manual are provided with amendments at no further cost and that any other party is charged an amendment fee. ICAO has confirmed that policy and that charges for amendments will be made to any purchaser of the document, as well as any entity where (free) quota has been exceeded With respect to the length of the edition cycle, the JWG noted that the cyclical period between editions was originally proposed to be 5 years and that IMO has since indicated a preference for 2 year cycles. In the first instance, ICAO acknowledged that a five year cycle would be a huge improvement to the high workload that is currently generated by the production of the Manual. When, however, IMO subsequently signaled a preference to publish every 2 years, the ICAO Administration Bureau noted that a three year cycle would be preferable as this would be in keeping with the ideal ICAO Annex cycle. A three year cycle was well received by other sections within the ICAO Secretariat which, it was suggested, would meet the needs of users for a Manual that was always sufficiently up to date and, at the same time, would reduce the workload and expense associated with more frequent publication The JWG noted, however, that ICAO is flexible in this regard and is suggesting that the ICAO and IMO Secretariats should continue a dialogue in consideration of both organization s internal processes and the operational, technical and economic implications. ICAO now seeks JWG input in this regard With respect to the suggestion that the Manual should be made freely available, the JWG noted that this issue would seem now to be settled in principle, that both organizations, for good reasons to do with the generation of necessary revenue to cover costs of production and, particularly, translation, and for funding SAR work within ICAO and IMO and technical cooperation work in the field, are obliged to retain the Manual as a saleable document The WP proposed that the JWG may see merit in a recommendation directed to the organizations Technical Co-operation Bureaus that as a matter of policy, all technical cooperation missions to less developed States should consider the three Volumes of the Manual as being a fundamental deliverable The JWG noted that IMO has expressed a preference for the Manual to be published every two years in bound form and interim amendments are proposed to be in full page form and downloadable. ICAO on the other hand, prefers a three year cycle for revised editions and a loose leaf format. A third suggestion has been made that Volumes I and II could be bound and Volume III left as a loose leaf document for ease of use on flight decks and on bridges. Evidently, the period of the publishing cycle impacts on the optimal style of the amendments. ICAO has not expressed an adamant position with respect to the form of the Manual, whether bound or loose leaf and seeks further input from the JWG in

11 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD this regard The JWG responded by strongly endorsing the institutionalization of the practice of making the three Volumes of the IAMSAR Manual available to petitioning States during technical cooperation missions IMO advised that its preference for publication of the Manual every two years is due to its customary practice of printing bound Volumes and the confusion often caused by managing loose leaf amendments. IMO considered that a 2-year cycle would limit the need for too-frequent amendment. A longer cycle would suggest a loose leaf format to better accommodate a greater number of amendments over the period between editions. IMO experience was that users are dissatisfied with the loose leaf format. An opinion was expressed that because seafarers are accustomed to editing documents on an ongoing basis, users should find it manageable to cope with either a loose leaf or cut and paste amendment process over a reasonable period between editions. The IMO secretary further observed that users are not constrained to purchase the Manual every two years if the cost is a disincentive; users could make amendments to the same set of Volumes over a period of four years or longer The JWG noted that Volume III is now in ring binder format but not loose leaf and as such meets the requirement for ease of use in cockpits and on bridges Opinion was expressed that there should be instructions included in the front of Manuals for management of amendments by users together with a list of current pages. These instructions should include a reference to the appropriate web site for access to amendments. If this was done, it would not matter whether the Manual is published every 2 or 3 years because editions could be kept up to date more easily. Some comment was made that a publishing cycle of 3 years should be manageable; the documents should not become too messy with cut and pasted amendments in that time Opinion was expressed that it is inconsistent to suggest that it is not necessary to buy the Manual every 2 years and then publish it every 2 years and a 3 year cycle is therefore more suitable Further comments included an observation that IMO does not have a process that numbers sequential amendments but should have it. Further, it was contended that amendments should be in same format as the printed text of the Manual to facilitate the cutting and pasting process Another observation was made that the frequency of editions will affect the amount of revenue. In this consideration, a 3 year cycle seems preferable An overall comment was made that the ICAO and IMO Manual printing processes were out of date and efforts should be made to bring the process into line with contemporary practices that are, essentially, electronic and web based. It was further stated that efforts to keep documents secure could be counterproductive and more effort should be expended on ease of access through e- processes. An apparent focus on commercial benefit that might arise through restricted access and frequent publication should be overturned in favour of a customer service that is convenient and affordable and, particularly, e- centric A member suggested that ICAO could keep on publishing Volume III in ring binder and Volumes I and II in loose leaf format, so giving users an option with respect to format. Some economies of scale might, however, be lost in respect of the Manual being a joint ICAO/IMO publication In conclusion, the JWG agreed that IMO and ICAO should align their publication procedures and that, in particular, ICAO and IMO should negotiate the format of the Manual and the publishing cycle.

12 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD Recommendation 16/5:.1 that ICAO and IMO Technical Cooperation Bureau should be advised of the JWG recommendation that the three Volumes of the IAMSAR Manual should be made available as a matter of course and free of charge to petitioning States at the time of SAR technical cooperation missions to those States;.2 that the ICAO and IMO Secretariats should be advised that the JWG would view with favour the inclusion of instructions for user management of amendments and, also, a list of current pages in the front of Volumes I to III of the Manual;.3 that the ICAO and IMO Secretariats should continue to negotiate an agreement with respect to a common IAMSAR Manual publication cycle, format and amendment process; and.4 that the ICAO and IMO Secretariats should be advised that the JWG would view with favour an increasing modernization of the IAMSAR Manual publishing and distribution process along contemporary electronic and web-based lines with more emphasis on customer convenience and accessibility. 4. AGENDA ITEM 4 - SAR OPERATIONAL PRINCIPLES, PROCEDURES AND TECHNIQUES Responding to Mhz distress beacon alerts 4.1 The JWG noted document ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16-WP.8 (United States), Responding to Mhz distress beacon alerts which suggested reporting and SAR procedures for MHz distress beacon alerts, noting that although the MHz distress beacon is no longer required to be carried by aircraft, and satellite processing of signals from this type of beacon was terminated in 2009, many MHz beacons are still in use and can create difficulties in search planning for SAR responders. 4.2 The JWG noted the suggestion that IMO and ICAO may again need to urge States to transition from MHz to the 406 MHz distress beacon. The paper reminded the JWG that MHz signals could require extensive search effort by SAR authorities and that while procedures exist; they may not be in common usage for this type of search planning. 4.3 The WP contained extensive procedural text of high value regarding search strategies in the circumstance of 121.5MHz signals being received in various situations. In this regard, JWG noted: Annex 1 to the WP that contained proposed search planning guidance as a new last appendix to Volume II; and Annex 2 that contained a proposed amendment to Volume II for incorporation of the proposed new appendix, and new text in Volume III for use by pilots in flight. Recommendation 16/6:.1 that IMO and ICAO should be advised of the concern of the JWG that whilst satellites no longer detect alerts nor determine the positions of MHz distress beacons as of February 2009, large numbers of aviators and mariners are still using this type of beacon in lieu of the 406 MHz distress beacon and this information, and its implications, should be included in ICAO and IMO correspondence with States; and

13 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD.2 that the proposed amendments, (Annex 1 and 2), at Appendix G should be made to Volumes II and III of the IAMSAR Manual. Aeronautical use of Personal Locator Beacons (PLBs) and ELTs 4.4 The JWG noted document ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16-WP.11 (Australia), Regulating carriage of personal locator beacons, which highlighted some considerations with respect to the prospect of Personal Locator Beacons (PLBs) being carried as a satisfactory substitute for ELTs, particularly in the general aviation environment. 4.5 The JWG noted that while ICAO has developed no guidance material to Contracting States with respect to the use of devices other than ELTs, development of PLBs and other alert and location signalling devices has accelerated in recent years, and there are sectors within the aviation industry keen for PLBs to be reconsidered as an acceptable means of compliance. At the same time, reports of nonactivation of approved ELTs at the time of aircraft accidents has given rise to concern about their reliability and their superior suitability as reflected in the ICAO SARPs 4.6 The JWG noted that Australia has allowed the use of PLBs and EPIRBs on general aviation aircraft as substitutes for a fixed automatic ELT since The rationale for this revolves around concerns about the reliability of ELTs especially in the water environment - their extra cost, and the fact that a PLB can be activated once a crashed aircraft is evacuated. 4.7 The JWG noted that there appears to be no statistical information that has been collated internationally which identifies a success or failure rate of ELT operation in survivable or non-survivable accidents. 4.8 Australia has developed specifications with respect to PLBs although these are not entirely harmonized with other States. 4.9 The JWG noted that some of the ramifications of extensive use of PLBs in aviation could be: pilot responsibility and education; registration of PLBs (in Australia, this concern has been reportedly resolved by only having one register established for all of ELT, PLB and EPIRB); determining the State authority responsible for responding to the various types of beacons and how those authorities might cooperate with other service providers, including ARCCs; the possibility of activation of PLBs at a crash site leading to shutting down of the homing signal of other ELTs in the vicinitys; whether technical specifications should be required for PLBs The WP invited the JWG to: o o exchange information on: their States regulations in regard to the allowable use of PLBs, particularly in the general aviation sector, data relating to acceptability of performance of distress beacons in the situation of aircraft accidents; discuss the potential carriage of PLBs by aircraft as an acceptable means of compliance with crash alert and location signaling equipment regulations, including their substitute for automatic ELTs; and

14 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD o consider recommending to ICAO a way forward for decisive determination of these issues Discussion ensued with respect to cascading degrees of regulation (including carriage of crash alert and location equipment) with regard to various types of aircraft operation: commercial air transport, charter aircraft and general aviation aircraft The JWG noted advice that ELT is a broad term that describes a transmitter that operates within the satellite system. Fittings, mountings etc. are different aspects of an ELT system and requirements for these can be determined by regulators at a national level Members agreed that little ELT reliability data is available Canada has had a similar political lobbying experience from COPA as has Australia from AOPA which has resulted in a regulatory void with respect to provisions for carriage by general aviation aircraft. A Canadian study of ELT reliability is in the final stages of development. Some statistics should soon be forthcoming and will be conveyed to the ICAO Secretariat. Fitting standards were investigated in the study, as were various generations of ELTs. A final decision with respect to carriage requirements in Canada will be made at senior governmental level. Canada is unlikely to allow PLB replacement for ELTs but to allow pilots to supplement ELTs with PLBs. Canada believes the 406MHz ELTs are the only device that will suffice as a regulated crash alert and location unit. If other alerting devices are allowed, they will be required to conform to similar specifications. The general aviation community is the sector most involved in SAR actions The Cospas-Sarsat Secretariat advised that an AOPA Regulatory Brief (22 Jan 2009) provided that for 406 MHz ELTs, the reliability rate is 83 per cent and 73 per cent for MHz ELTs The U.K. aeronautical member made the point that operative ELTs activate automatically; PLBs do not. He suggested that a key question should be how ELTs can be made more reliable while allowing for supplementary carriage of PLBs The JWG noted the comment that most failures of ELTs seem to be at the point of antenna connection The Swedish aeronautical member reported Sweden having found that attempts to implement ICAO-type regulations for carriage of 406 MHz by general aviation domestically impossible to mandate and, as a result, had agreed to their carriage of PLBs. This has resulted in a wider carriage of PLBs than ELTs. It is accepted that there are disadvantages of non-automatic activation. Registration is a continuing problem The observer of South Africa remarked that ELTs are only activated at the last minute. He queried why a facility could not be installed for the pilot to activate an ELT in anticipation of a crash or, alternatively, by other sensors that indicate that the aircraft is operating outside the safety envelope The Australian member reported that Australia had found increased compliance with carriage requirements once the lower-cost PLBs were permitted as a means of compliance The ICAO representative explained the present ICAO policy with respect to ELT/PLB carriage and requested reaction from members. While little comment was made, there was general agreement that ELT carriage remained appropriate to internationally operated aircraft and that PLBs were a convenient crash alert and location tool for recreational aircraft activities The JWG was requested to make statistical data and relevant aspects of state policy and

15 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD practices available to the ICAO Secretariat within the next two months bday@icao.int. The Secretariat will be reconsidering PLB carriage within the short term. SAR related to recent aircraft accidents 4.23 The JWG noted document ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16-WP.15 (Singapore), SAR Alerting: AF447 which highlighted certain aspects of ATS SAR alerting procedures enacted by the Brazilian Authorities with respect to the flight of AF447. When the aircraft was being transferred from one ATC provider to another, contact was lost prior to the hand-over position. Brazilian ATC carried out communication checks with the adjacent ATC unit from which the aircraft had flown. A Brazilian ATC representative was reported to have later explained a delay in search action by stating that ATC was waiting for the fuel expiry time before commencing SAR operations The WP proposed that operational personnel are trained to commence SAR operations at the time that an aircraft loses communication and disappears from radar coverage The JWG was invited to discuss the development of guidelines for commencement of SAR operations by SAR authorities when aircraft lose contact both under radar surveillance and not Discussion was held over pending more input from other related papers and presentations on this topic The JWG noted document ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16-IP.2 (ICAO Secretariat), SAR Alerting: AF447, which was submitted in conjunction with the Singapore WP.15 and that also addressed the SAR Alerting procedures associated with the flight of AF447. Its purpose was to add anecdotal background information that might assist the JWG to assess the suitability of the existing alerting procedures and whether a need may exist for enforcement of the procedures and/or development of guidance material for worldwide distribution The JWG noted that whilst a final report into the accident had not been released, anecdotal information quoted in the WP suggested that: no SAR alerting action of any kind was taken until about 3 hours after the aircraft s missed position report at the Brazil/Senegal FIR boundary, an alert phase was not declared until about 6 hours after the missed position report at the Brazil/Senegal boundary, and the distress phase was not declared until about 20 minutes later The JWG was invited to discuss: the potential for collapse of even well documented procedures under pressure of live emergencies; the extent to which international SARPs should be reiterated in national codes and whether the degree to which this is done has an impact on the integrity of training and operations; the implications of controllers working with virtual track displays rather than realtime radar returns with respect to human factors that might affect controllers expectations, responses and initiatives as they impact on SAR alerting; and whether ICAO should take any action to allay errors of regulation, operational procedures, training, and human factors, especially potential complacency in a virtual track display environment.

16 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD Discussion was held-over pending a presentation of SAR aspects relating to the AF447 accident by the French aeronautical member The JWG noted document ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16-WP.16 (Italy), Means of communication and alerting information between ATS Units and RCC/RSC/local rescue facilities in case of aircraft in emergency at sea, which provided a proposal for expeditious communication and operational procedures for the exchange of alerting information between ATS Units and RCC/RSCs/ local rescue facilities in case of an aircraft emergency at sea The JWG noted that to ensure optimal interaction between the ATC Units and SAR facilities, a standard information reporting format had been adopted in Italy. Italy has also developed the following means of communication between coastal airport TWR/AFIS Units and RCC/RSCs/local rescue facilities, as appropriate: a) alarm panel to be activated by the TWR that incorporates visual and audio alarms; b) recorded direct calling net; and c) direct telefax Italy also uses a grid map as a common reference around airports The JWG noted a proposal that it share opinions with respect to SAR alerting and assess suggested amendments to the IAMSAR Volume II and Appendices G, I and K with particular regard to aircraft emergency at sea 4.35 The Swedish aeronautical member reported on a process whereby Sweden is implementing a framework of Annex 12 provisions which refers to the responsibility of ATS to provide a SAR alerting service. In this regard, Sweden is developing check lists for various emergencies that require controllers to take appropriate alerting action Some discussion ensued whether the information contained in the WP is too detailed for inclusion in the IAMSAR Manual It was agreed that further discussion would be encouraged in the context of the reports on the ill-fated AF447 SAR watch and SAR alerting to be conducted later in the meeting. 4.37a The chairman introduced a presentation by Mr. Philippe Raphanaud on the accident involving AF447 by noting that AF447 was one of three major passenger aircraft accidents at sea in Two of these accidents resulted in casualties taking to the water and the other involved extensive searching at sea. Such tragedies are a strong reminder of the need for close cooperation and coordination between aeronautical and maritime SAR services. Mr. Raphanaud highlighted the following shortcomings and deficiencies expressed in the early findings of the French Air Investigation Bureau with respect to the accident involving AF447. Some outstanding shortcomings and deficiencies have become apparent in the analysis: Unsatisfactory handover/takeover between ATC units; Prolonged delay in declaration of SAR phases; Apparent unwillingness of ATC units to accept responsibility for declaration of an emergency; Cooperation in allocation of foreign SAR Units was effected through diplomatic channels

17 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD rather than between RCCs; Lack of recognition of the existence, authority and responsibility of State SAR systems; Independent calculation of search area by three RCCs that resulted in three different areas; Lack of coordination of SAR Units on search; Miscommunication through lack of common language proficiency; Lack of bilateral agreements between adjoining States; and Lack of databases of neighbouring RCC contacts. These shortcomings and deficiencies raised questions with respect to: Sufficiency of operational procedures; Effectiveness of ELTs, especially in water contact accidents; Need for international SAR exercises; Need for research into the need for standardised operational phraseology and mandated language proficiency requirements; Importance of ATC/SAR coordination; Suitability of military coordination of civil SAR services; Joint aviation/maritime RCCs; Sufficiency in coverage of Global SAR Plan with respect to the high number of SRRs and RCCs; and Implementation of Situation Reports (SITREPS) between RCCs and Administrations Drawing on references in the IAMSAR Manual to SAR alerting procedures at Volume I, Chapter and elsewhere, the JWG discussed whether present training of operational staff, regulatory oversight and, at a high level of State, education and awareness of ATS hand-off coordination, SAR watch and SAR alerting is appropriate and sufficient A splinter group convened to consider appropriate recommendations in the light of SAR aspects of the AF447 catastrophe and similar recent accidents A correspondence group was established, comprising aeronautical members from Singapore, Sweden, Australia, the maritime member from Hong Kong China and the maritime observer from Italy to give further consideration to these matters with a view to reporting back to JWG In the meantime, the splinter group proposed the following recommendations that were supported by the JWG: Recommendation 16/7:.1 that in consideration of some of the issues reported to the JWG related to the SAR action for Air France 447, and of similar incidents where ATS SAR alerting services appeared to lack timeliness, ICAO should reinforce to States the critical importance of effective SAR Alerting procedures and their obligations in this respect in accordance with Annex 11 and ICAO Doc.4444;.2 that ICAO should draw the attention of Contracting States to the merit of ATS informing RCCs of any doubt about the safety of an aircraft at the earliest opportunity to facilitate early Search and Rescue planning;.3 that ICAO and IMO should consider mandating a minimum standard of English language proficiency for RCC staff at level 2 on the ICAO Language Proficiency Rating scale;

18 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD that the Editorial Group should give priority to a review of IAMSAR Volume II, Chapter 3, in order to introduce more structure to the guidance material with respect to SAR alerting procedures; and.5 that ICAO should review certain aspects of the provisions regarding carriage of ELTs in the light of reported failure of ELTs to provide alerts to the SAR system at the time of recent aircraft accidents and with a view to reviewing the method of activation of these devices. Commercially available locating, tracking and emergency notification devices 4.42 The JWG noted document ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16-WP.9 (United States), Emerging technologies in commercially available alerting devices, which provided further comment on emerging technologies in commercially available alerting devices. Technologies of concern are those which fall outside of the established international SAR system. COMSAR 13 had agreed that ICAO and IMO should address the issue and the impact on the effectiveness and integrity of States SAR services but had made no further comment or recommendations This paper provided information on the perspective of the United States and makes two assumptions: discussion on standards and guidance does not presently consider these devices as being equal to or suitable substitutes for approved distress beacons but recognizes that they could offer the pubic a means of alerting SAR services; and formal recommendations will apply to commercial satellite systems and likely will not include other technologies such as cellular telephones and personal data assistants The JWG noted the contention that issues of policy and operational procedures associated with the growing use of these satellite devices should be considered on the international level. Such international guidance and standards could then also be helpful for national application with respect to SAR matters relating to cellular telephone, PDA, and similar systems The JWG noted that the Radio Technical Commission for Maritime Services (RTCM) has formed a Special Committee to consider these devices - see: and has been tasked to consider the need for the establishment of standards for satellite emergency notification and locating devices; and if the committee agrees that there is such a need, develop appropriate RTCM Standards or reports addressing minimum operating and performance requirements, technical requirements, and/or test procedures, with a view to their use for the production and possible certification of such devices. This Special Committee has made initial decisions that it will: focus on commercial satellite systems; propose the term and acronym of: Satellite Emergency Notification Device (SEND); and consider a glossary definition to include: A device voluntarily carried by a person or craft which can transmit notification of an emergency or distress by means of commercial satellite systems which are not part of the international aviation and maritime search and rescue system The JWG noted that the guidelines of RTCM are dissimilar in detail but of fundamental similarity in principle to the draft advice and recommendations made by JWG 15 to ICAO and IMO.

19 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD 4.47 The Annex to WP.9 contains the document prepared by the JWG 15 Splinter Group, that was proposed to be further developed and issued by ICAO and IMO, as advice and recommendations to users of devices and providers of SAR services. With respect to further advancing this annex, which the JWG considers to be important and helpful, discussion ensued as to whether ICAO and IMO should take measures or encourage States to introduce legislation that governs commercially available SAR alerting and location units or otherwise controls their use Opinion was given that the IAMSAR Manual exists to elaborate upon international law that addresses aviation and maritime SAR services and does so by publishing appropriate guidance manual. Text material, therefore, should be decided upon in a top down process rather than bottom up and be limited to subject matter contained within the framework of over-arching legislation. To introduce material that falls outside the mandate of the Conventions that are administered by IMO and ICAO would be to publish uncoordinated matter that falls outside the formal Global SAR Plan. Policy, practices and procedures evolving out of reference to such equipment and systems would be ungovernable The JWG agreed that all commercial providers of equipment and services that venture into the SAR domain and that seek to have their products integrated into State SAR response systems have a responsibility to research and coordinate with State authorities how they can integrate into the Global SAR Plan by abiding with the processes and procedures elaborated in the IAMSAR Manual that, in turn, are derived from international law The JWG noted that advice was given by some States of MoUs being developed by State SAR providers with providers of commercially available units to ensure appropriate input of alerts into the State SAR systems The JWG considered that it is unrealistic to expect that formal State SAR services are able to approach each of these commercial producers and operators, and concluded that a system of standardized notification procedures is unrealistic. On the other hand, it is reasonable that ICAO and IMO should make general information available Registration of non-compliant units was considered to be a big issue The ICAO Secretary suggested that alerts received from non-compliant devices should be treated as information incidentally received and be subject to customary communication, verification and intelligence checks and acted upon in accordance with those findings The JWG noted that these units are not essentially emergency notification devices as such; they can, however, incorporate an emergency notification facility (so called) as an add-on facility It was suggested that IMO COMSAR should take the matter of commercially available, noncompliant SAR alerting devices into account in its anticipated review of the elements and procedures of the GMDSS. It was further suggested that an invitation should be to be extended to ICAO to participate. Recommendation 16/8: that for future meetings at IMO regarding the review of the elements and procedures of the GMDSS, an ICAO aeronautical SAR expert should be invited to participate in view of the need to harmonize policy and procedures with respect to commercially available alerting devices A splinter group was tasked with further developing guidance material to this topic that was first produced by JWG 15. The draft guidance, as accepted by the JWG, is listed at Appendix H to this report.

20 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD Recommendation 16/9:.1 that COMSAR should take the matter of commercially available, non-compliant SAR alerting devices into account in its anticipated review of the elements and procedures of the GMDSS;.2 that consideration should be given by IMO and ICAO to development of a term to clearly identify the alert and location devices which are of concern to SAR authorities; and.3 that on the basis of Appendix H, IMO should issue a Circular and ICAO should originate a State Letter making reference to the availability of commercially available locating, tracking and emergency notification devices and services and outlining precautionary measures that should be taken by States in overseeing their use. Exploitation of cell phone signal for SAR 4.57 The JWG noted document ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16-WP.17 (Canada), Exploitation of cell phone signal for SAR, which described some of Canada s experiences with cell phone signals in the conduct of SAR operations. The JWG noted that the knowledge that there is a cell phone (or sat phone) onboard a missing craft can prove useful during the prosecution of the case. A suggestion was made that recording a cell phone number on a flight plan is a worthwhile procedure The WP described a recent case of a missing aircraft in the mountainous region of Western Canada in which the service provider was able to detect an emission from the particular cell phone known to be carried by the crew and was able to identify the particular tower relaying the signal. This reduced the search area from about 200 square miles (in mountainous terrain) to about 20 square miles. A company technician was also able to provide a range and bearing from the relay tower The JWG noted that conclusions drawn from this and other SAR experiences involving cell phones by Canada are: SAR providers must become very familiar with the information that can be exploited from a cell phone signal; MoUs should be drawn up to enhance access to this information for SAR purposes, including cross border situations; and SOPs should be drawn up to ensure thorough exploitation of a cell phone signal in the determination of a search area The JWG noted the information provided. Discussion followed of other States experiences and lessons learned The U.S. reported that cell phones are used frequently in prosecuting their SAR services. Researching cell phone data is an assigned duty function of RCC officers In Sweden, general aviation flights filing a flight plan are required to record a cell phone number on the flight plan form. The RCC has formal agreements with major telephone companies for divulgence of user information. Verification may be required from the police Norway has developed standardized cell phone procedures that are accepted by telephone companies that involve an initial telephone call from the RCC followed by an confirmation. The

21 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD companies provide a common call number for RCCs for use in emergencies. Police intervention is not necessary. Feedback from telephone companies comes quickly It was proposed that procedures be developed for international use, that telephone companies should be made aware of the need and should agree to cooperate and that their input should be free of charge The Australian member reported that the Australian Privacy Act covers divulgence of user information. The RCC has a standard form for completion by RCC staff and forwarding through police authorities in Australian States to telephone companies. RCC Australia has had good experiences of communicating directly with the SAR section of police units in this sort of situation rather than through general duty police staff. RCC Australia, Civil Aviation Safety Authority and Airservices Australia recommend that general aviation pilots include cell phone numbers on their flight plans. Most pilots comply The Canadian aeronautical member reported that their goal is to set up a check list of questions that should be asked of telephone operators by RCC staff. This requires a closer understanding of the amount and accuracy of information that may be gleaned from telephone companies The JWG considered that the GMDSS could incorporate the aspect of information being made available by telephone companies to be free of charge. Recommendation 16/10: that to facilitate use of cell phone information in the prosecution of SAR cases, procedures should be developed for the exploitation of cell phone signals for both the aeronautical and maritime SAR situations on an international scale and, in particular, in this regard, further guidance material should be included in the IAMSAR Manual recommending that the National SAR Plan should include provision for retrieving information from State telecommunication authorities. Homing on a damaged 406 ELT 4.68 The JWG noted document ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16-IP.1 (Australia), Location of crashed DeHavilland Twin Otter aircraft by homing to a damaged 406 ELT, which informed members about the benefit of 406 direction finding equipment on SAR aircraft when the Cospas-Sarsat system does not detect a damaged ELT A case study was presented concerning a recent crash of a DH Twin Otter aircraft in the highlands of Papua New Guinea. An Australian Dornier 328 SAR aircraft detected a weak and unrecognizable signal on the /028 MHz scanner. Despite no audible tone or HEX identification displayed on the scanner, the Dornier operator recognized the 50 second cyclical signal of the ELT. After some judicious manoeuvring, a most probable position was determined, helicopters were dispatched and the wreckage located Discussion ensued about the exceptional work done by the SAR flight crew and the worth of sharing the report of their work with other SAR responders.

22 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD SAR capacity project in Ghana 4.71 The JWG noted document ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16-IP.3 (Sweden), Presentation of an aeronautical SAR capacity project in Ghana, which gave information about a completed project to upgrade aeronautical SAR capacity in Ghana as an outcome of cooperation between Ghana Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) and Swedavia. The project used Annex 12 Search and Rescue to the Convention on International Civil Aviation as its basic document of reference This work involved strengthening of various air navigation services including SAR. The objective was to meet goals with locally available resources and facilities, most of which are owned by the military. Findings of shortcomings against Annex 12 determined the project activities to be undertaken. SAR operational training was given to air traffic controllers who were well placed to absorb it The Ghanian Administration agreed to further training and exercises in cooperation with counterpart organisations. An exercise was convened at a subsequent date. Work was undertaken on improving the National SAR Plan Ghanian SAR personnel later visited Sweden and Finland for SAR familiarisation. A seminar was convened in Accra in January A National SAR Plan has now been finalised and published. Six controllers have been trained to be effective SAR mission coordinators. Outstanding needs are for more involvement from senior management at an appropriate level; that includes an appreciation on management s part for delegation of operational functions. Recommendation 16/11: that ICAO and IMO should be advised of the good work continuing to be done by various States in technical cooperation work in Africa, and of the inevitable long term nature of that work and the ever present need for funding. Long-range Identification and Tracking (LRIT) 4.76 The JWG noted document ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16-WP.3 (IMO Secretariat), Effects of measures to enhance maritime and aeronautical security on SAR services, including the implementation of the Long-range Identification and Tracking (LRIT) system which contained draft amendments to an existing MSC circular with amendments to provide SAR services the option of obtaining LRIT information on specific ships. The MSC circular will be published in the near future and satisfies the recommendation from JWG 15 for such a capability (see also paragraph and section 9.3). 5. AGENDA ITEM 5 - SAR SYSTEM ADMINSTRATION, ORGANIZATION AND IMPLEMENTATION METHODS Change of ownership of vessels registered in Cospas-Sarsat and national databases 5.1 The JWG noted document ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16-WP.14 (Singapore), Registration: Cospas-Sarsat Database change of ownership, which reported problems that had been encountered with respect to change of ownership of vessels registered in Cospas-Sarsat and national databases whereby requests from the Singapore RCC have been met with responses to the effect that data was not available from countries where the vessels were registered. Time had been wasted in seeking the appropriate source of information.

23 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD 5.2 The JWG discussed practices to ensure that beacon data is updated when changes to ownership occur, and means whereby owners are obliged to notify change of ownership to database administrators. 5.3 Cospas-Sarsat advised that they time-tag each registration and, where possible, send an to the owner requesting any update of registration details after two years. In some cases, owners have not given their addresses so follow up is impossible. C-S Council, however, has requested States to ensure, as much as possible, that owners provide addresses. The C-S-administered IBRD allows owners themselves to update their details on the database. A suggestion was made that in the registration form, a mandatory field for address be included to facilitate automated correspondence regarding registration records The French aeronautical member reported that France has enacted regulations that require owners to keep registration details up-to-date. 5.5 The Australian member reported that Australia uses an on-line d-base with 100,000 registrations now made. Australian regulations require carriage and registration. A sticker that can only be procured after registration must appear on the beacon. When audits are performed, stickers must be visible. From manufacturers data, it is apparent that about 30 per cent of beacons are not registered. 5.6 The Cospas-Sarsat Secretariat reported that internationally, over the past five years, per cent of beacons had not been registered. 5.7 The U.S. aeronautical member reported that the U.S. d-base allows each beacon only to be registered once, thus contradictory data cannot be input. 5.8 The New Zealand observer advised that New Zealand has a procedure for checking with each registered owner to ensure up-to-date data. Recommendation 16/12: that IMO and ICAO should recommend to Cospas-Sarsat that arrangements should be made for the electronic form, that is used by owners to register their beacons, to include a required field for address. 7. AGENDA ITEM 7 - SAR COMMUNICATIONS Cospas-Sarsat 7.1 The JWG noted document ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16-WP.12 (Cospas-Sarsat Secretariat), Report on Cospas-Sarsat system status, operations and future developments, which provided information on the status of the International Cospas-Sarsat Programme as at 1 September Matters included: Alert data assist statistics; Geographical distribution of alerts; Two false alarm rates known as SAR false alarm rate and Beacon false alarm rate and an apparent trend towards an overall decrease in beacon false alarm rates;

24 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD Statistics concerning beacons in use, showing a steady percentage (about 70 per cent) of registered beacons; Statistics with respect to beacons registered on the IBRD showing an increased use by SAR services, the top ten user States being USA, France, the UAE, Canada, Brazil, Russia, Argentina, Sweden, Vietnam and Norway; LEOSAR and GEOSAR systems that ceased satellite processing of MHz signals as of 1 February, As at 1 September, 2009, 57 LEOLUTs, 21 GEOLUTs and 29 MCCs were in operation; Quality management system to which the Council has approved changes to include continuous monitoring and objective assessment process with a 1 April, 2009, date for the start of monitoring. Assessment procedures may result in various follow-up actions; Status of MEOSAR development which continues to progress. First operational data may become available from Coverage will be dependent on availability of ground receiving stations (MEOLUTs); and A capability for a Return Link Service from the Galileo/SAR components of the future MEOSAR system. Procedures in this respect are yet to be defined. 7.2 The JWG engaged in discussion about return link technology which is of concern in as much as it seems to be technologically driven rather than operationally. Technical features, if utilised, could have significant impact on the efficiency and effectiveness of SAR actions. In particular, concern was expressed about messages being generated by the Mission Control Centre (MCC) rather than the RCC. Recommendation 16/13: that ICAO and IMO should request that Cospas-Sarsat contact the Galileo organisation to express the concern of the JWG that the return link technology should be widely discussed within the international operational SAR community to ensure that the capability is singularly beneficial to the saving of lives and not be, as could occur without sufficient consultation, counter-productive. 7.3 The JWG noted document ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16-WP.13 (Cospas-Sarsat Secretariat), Cospas-Sarsat information of interest to SPOCs/RCCs, which reported information on the International C-S Programme and decisions of interest Matters included: A new requirement for MCCs to conduct monthly communication checks with their SPOCs that would be reported upon to IMO COMSAR as part of the annual C-S Status report. A list was presented of completely non-responsive SPOCs and those that are generally non-responsive. A table of link reliability was included in the WP. Procedures for back up of SAR alert notification in the event of no response being received from the targeted SPOC, both in the case of maritime and aeronautical emergencies. Agreement has been reached at C-S JC with respect to these procedures and they will be further advanced at the 43 rd Session of the Cospas-Sarsat Council in October 2009.

25 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD Continuing utilisation of C/S G.007 as a document to be held in MRCCs, the repository of data on SSAS and S-VDR transmitters and its translation into Portuguese and Italian languages. Revised ambiguity resolution procedures for LEOSAR Doppler locations in cases where a beacon is first located by two LEO satellites following the same (or close) ground track(s). Discrepancies in the nature of SPOC contact information which C-S JC agreed should be resolved by MCC operators providing corrections wherever possible. A change to C-S procedures whereby encoded positions would be provided to SPOCs to an accuracy of hundredths of a minute. 7.4 Discussion ensued with respect to ambiguity resolution and the practice of turning off a satellite for resolution. The risk in doing this is in not being able to turn a satellite on after turning it off. 7.5 With respect to lessening the problem of non-responsive SPOCs, it was advised that the Inmarsat system has associated RCCs that could be a workable second point of contact. Some MCCs practice a shotgun distribution methodology if in doubt about contact with a SPOC. The Cospas-Sarsat Secretariat emphasised the desirability of a single point of contact. 7.6 Opinion was expressed that contact with control towers promised the most likely positive outcome in the event of non-responsive SPOCs. Distribution of alets 7.7 Another global satellite provider is seriously considering participating in the GMDSS and, based on its current practice, would ground all their alerts to a single point of contact universally. Managing on-going distribution poses a huge challenge to the global SAR system. The need for a central repository and distribution system was emphasised. 7.8 Reference was made to the need, on several grounds, for a reassessment of the organisational aspects of the Global SAR Plan. Unless the operational SAR community gives this urgent attention, there is a real risk that there will be a consolidation of SRRs and RCCs that will be driven by economic rather than operational imperatives. 7.9 Comment was made that an education and awareness campaign was required to reach the top levels of States Administrations with respect to their SAR responsibilities The question was put as to whether the Global SAR Plan would be better served by fewer and more effective SRRs and RCCs. Recommendation 16/14: the JWG, in consideration of: the need to revise the GMDSS, including centralisation of some communication services, the extent of non-responsive SPOCs that prejudices delivery of SAR alerts to many States, the trend towards consolidation of air traffic services within Flight Information Regions (FIRs), the disinclination of the airlines to continue paying the present quantum of air navigation charges to air navigation service providers, which can be expected to put pressure on service providers to

26 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD consolidate, the existing recommendation that aeronautical SRRs should be coincident with FIRs, the existing recommendation that maritime SRRs should be coincident with aeronautical SRRs, the advent of increasingly effective world-wide communications that obviates the need for a separate SAR service to be provided by all Contracting/Member States, the findings of the ICAO USOAP programme and the recent AFCAC/ICAO SAR project in Africa that many State SAR services are not effective, the continuing inability of some States to improve their SAR services to an acceptable level of proficiency, the success of the ICAO COSCAP programme in regionalising many aeronautical support services, and the desire already expressed by some States to regionalise their SAR systems to ensure standardised SAR services across regions at a satisfactory level of compliance, recommends that ICAO and IMO should vigorously pursue their stated policies of facilitating the sub-regionalisation of SAR service provision as the optimal means of extending the coverage of SAR services at an acceptable level of standardised proficiency The JWG wishes to put on record its strong support for the ICAO and IMO policy of SAR (sub) regionalisation programmes and, in the first instance, the incipient ICAO/IMO project to sub-regionalise SAR services in southern Africa, as the optimal means for ensuring an acceptable level of standardised SAR services throughout all regions within the Global SAR Plan. 9. AGENDA ITEM 9 - ANY OTHER BUSINESS 9.1 Presentationon the accident involving an A-310 aircraft near Comoros Mr. Jean Christophe Rocuet brought the attention of the JWG to circumstances surrounding an accident involving an A-310 aircraft near Comoros in the Indian Ocean and highlighted the following aspects: No ELT signal was received by Cospas Sarsat; Confusion due to lack of leadership in RCC; The only ship close to the scene could not be contacted The JWG noted with interest those aspects of the accident of relevance to SAR and thanked Mr. Rocuet for his presentation. 9.2 Presentation on Inmarsat service provision Mr. Peter Blakehurst gave a short presentation on various aspects of Inmarsat service provision The JWG noted that there had been some recent public comment on the coverage provided by the geostationary satellites. Confirmation was provided that the guaranteed coverage, with 5 degree antenna elevation, was between 76 degrees latitude North and South. This roughly equates to 97 per cent of the earth s surface. With a zero degree antenna elevation, the coverage is extended to nearly 81 degrees The Inmarsat family of products was outlined including the new FleetBroadband range of FB500, FB250 and FB150, highlighting their capabilities for simultaneous voice and data transmission.

27 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD It was noted that the Inmarsat B is now ageing equipment that is no longer manufactured but continues to be supported, for the time being, by the manufacturers. It was further stated that due to this fact and the ongoing requirement to efficiently manage spectrum availability, there is ongoing discussion regarding the closure of this service. This cessation of service could be around the beginning of A new safety-related service for FleetBroadband terminals was unveiled. This is a shortcode dialling facility entitled 505 Emergency calling. Targeted at non-solas vessels with no call priority, it allows the user to be connected directly to one of three RCCs, (Netherlands, USA, and Australia), dependent on satellite region. The RCC will then ascertain the nature of the emergency and pass to the correct regional RCC for ongoing action. This service, although carrying no call priority, is free of charge to the user and will be available from the terminal even if call credit is exhausted. It will not be possible to bar 505 calls with the operator or user configurable barring options. It was stated that this system was in no way meant to pre-empt the GMDSS and suitably equipped vessels should always use the GMDSS as the first means of alerting The meeting noted this presentation with interest and thanked Inmarsat for the information. 9.3 Presentation on LRIT Mr. Andy Fuller gave a brief overview of the architecture and present status of the Longrange Identification and Tracking System for Ships (LRIT) In general, the purposes of LRIT are: to obtain regular position reports from ALL ships on international voyages, and o make them available to authorised (government) users o while protecting the commercial security of the data Ships send position reports automatically, four times a day, to the shore for storage in a Data Centre (DC) nominated by their Flag State. The reports are collected from them by an Application Service Provider (ASP), which adds some additional information and deposits the reports in the DC. State entities are entitled to receive these reports either as the Flag State, the Port State, or the Coastal State if the ship is within 1000 NM of their coast. The reporting rate can be increased (up to a limit of once every 15 minutes) on request from the entity Search and Rescue (SAR) entities are entitled to receive LRIT information for SAR purposes, but, because they are not charged for this information, they are urged to limit their requests for data to the minimum consistent with efficient and effective SAR operations. WP.3 contains the latest proposed version of the MSC Circular giving guidance to SAR Authorities on requesting and receiving LRIT information. SAR Authorities should make early arrangements with their national LRIT Data Centre to obtain LRIT information when required The status of the implementation of LRIT at the end of August 2009 was: 31 out of a total 67 expected Data Centres have been successfully integrated into the production LRIT environment; approximately 50 per cent of the total number of ships expected in the LRIT system had been successfully tested and were reporting; >80 per cent ships are expected to be reporting by the end of The JWG expressed great interest in the presentation and thanked Mr. Fuller through the

28 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD chair. 9.4 Presentation on the use of skysails Ms. Nachtegaal reported that a helicopter operated by the Netherlands recently encountered a ship flying a skysail at a height of 1000 feet. The skysail is used to aid propulsion cost-effectively. In the Netherlands FIR, the law disallows cabled kites above one hundred metres but the skysails are required to fly higher than that to gauge wind velocity. The skysails are not very visible and can also be flown at night. As such, they can be construed as being a hazard to aviation; some problems might be expected in conflict with helicopters. More consultation is required between skysail users and relevant authorities on these operations. A broader discussion is expected within the SAR community. 9.5 Trial involving simultaneous activation of multiple beacons Mr. Oliver advised the JWG that the U.K. is considering a trial involving simultaneous activation of multiple beacons to assess the impact on the Cospas-Sarsat system. This will be conducted in April/May 2010 in an area west of the Hebrides Islands. Manufacturers are cooperating. The results of the test will be available from Steve Huxley, Communications Manager, UKMCA. 10. AGENDA ITEM 10 - DRAFT TERMS OF REFERENCE AND PROVISIONAL AGENDA FOR JWG The JWG noted document ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16-WP.4 (IMO Secretariat), Draft terms of reference and provisional agenda for JWG/17, which sought that the JWG would propose its draft terms of reference (ToR) and provisional agenda for JWG The provisional agenda as proposed was adopted and is shown as Appendix I. It was noted that the IMO and ICAO letters of invitation contain the terms of reference plus additional guidelines. Since these guidelines are helpful, they are being incorporated as a new final paragraph to the terms of reference as shown in Appendix I Timing and venue of JWG The JWG 17 is expected to be held between 27 September and 1 October 2010, subject to endorsement by IMO s COMSAR and Maritime Safety Committee and approval from ICAO. The venue for JWG 17 will be known by mid-december after one of the member countries confirms its approval to hold the meeting In the event that neither of the States is able to confirm an offer to host, it may be necessary to fall back on ICAO Headquarters, Montréal, Canada, or IMO Headquarters, London, United Kingdom Vice chairman Mr. Day (ICAO) advised the Group that as requested at the opening of this session, there had been discussion about the selection of an aviation SAR member to serve as vice chairman in support of the chairman who is a maritime SAR member. Subsequently, Sqn Ldr Graham Clark (United Kingdom) registered his interest in assuming the function and was duly accepted into the position by the Group Expression of appreciation The chairman, on behalf of the JWG, expressed deep appreciation and sincere thanks for the arrangements made by the Ministry of Defence and UK Maritime Coast Guard Agency in hosting JWG 16. He further expressed his appreciation personally to Sqn Ldr Graham Clark, being the UK.

29 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD aeronautical member as well as this Session s host. The chair expressed his deep thanks on behalf of all members and observers for a meticulously prepared meeting by Graham and his staff and associates. It had been an outstandingly successful meeting The chairman finally expressed his sincere thanks for the active participation of the members and observers of the meeting and stated that it was first and foremost the quality of their input that gave assurance of the success of the JWG The JWG adopted its report to ICAO and the COMSAR Sub-Committee on Friday, 2 October Mr. Edwards closed the 16th session of the JWG at 12 noon.

30 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD APPENDIX A List of Attendees Name & Nation Company Position Contact Details Helder Contreiras Angola (observer) Mike Barton Australia (aeronautical member) Clarence Rainey Canada (aeronautical member) Henri Legros Canada (observer) Michael Donald Canada (observer) Li Zhuo China (observer) Georgios Savva Cyprus (observer) Petteri Leppanen Finland (observer) Philippe Raphanaud France (aeronautical member) Jean Christophe Rocuet France (observer) Georgios Christianos Greece (observer) Kwok Wai Chan Hong Kong, China (maritime member) Giovanni Gravina Italy (observer) Nishibun Ryuji Japan (maritime member) Anja Nachtegaal Netherlands (maritime member) Geoff Lunt New Zealand (observer) Stein Solberg Norway (maritime member) Stein Jarle Langvik Norway (observer) Nils-Ole Sunde Norway (observer) Maritime Organisation of West and Central Africa Representation. Australian Maritime Safety Authority Canada Command HQ Canadian Coast Guard National SAR Secretariat China Maritime Search and Rescue Centre Legal Advisor RCC Chief - Aviation J3 SAR SAR Manager Manager, Emerging Technology Operations Officer rep@mowcaimo.org.uk mike.barton@amsa.gov.au rainey.cr@forces.gc.ca henri.legros@dfo-mpo.gc.ca michael.donald@nss-snrs.gc.ca zhuoli@msa.gov.cn JRCC Larnaca SAR Officer Jrcc_cyp@cytanet.com.cy Finnish Border Guard HQ French Civil Aviation Maritime SAR Adviser Head of Aeronautical SAR petteri.leppanen@raja.fi Aircie Transport Air SAR Adviser jcroc@wanodoo.fr JRCC Piraeus Marine Department Italian Coast Guard Japan Coast Guard Netherlands Coastguard SAR Mission Controller Senior Marine Officer Search and Rescue Chief Planning of Office Special Assistant to Director of SAR Division SAR Adviser philippe.raphanaud@aviation-civile.gouv.fr jrccp@yen.gr kw_chan@mardep.gov.hk giovanni.gravina@mit.gov.it Nishibun-27u5ki@kaiho.mlit.go.jp anja.nachtegaal@kustwacht.nl RCCNZ Watch Leader geoff.lunt@maritimenz.govt.nz JRCC Stavanger Chief Operations stein.solberg@jrcc.stavanger.no JRCC Stavanger RCC Controller steinj@jrcc-stavanger.no JRCC Stavaanger RCC Controller noles@jrcc-stavanger.no

31 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD Name & Nation Company Position Contact Details Raymond Seah Singapore (aeronautical member) Christer Waldegren Sweden (maritime member) Annika Wallengren Sweden (aeronautical member) Andre Botes South Africa (observer) Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore Swedish Maritime Administration Swedish Civil Aviation Department South African Maritime Safety Authority Senior Air Traffic Control Manager Senior Adviser Senior SAR Adviser Head Maritime SAR Operations raymond_seah@caas.gov.sg christer.waldegren@sjofartsverket.se annika.wallengren@transportstyrelsen.se abotes@samsa.org.za Oguz Odabas Turkey MSRCC Ankara Chief Operator oodabas@yahoo.com (observer) Ahmed Al Jallaf Abu General Civil ATS Inspector aljallaf@gcaa.ae Dhabi (UAE) (observer) Aviation Authority Graham Clark UK RAF Search and Executive Officer sar-xo@sarf.raf.mod.uk (aeronautical member) Rescue Force Jim McWilliams UK HM Coastguard SAR Operations jim.mcwilliams@mcga.gov.uk (maritime member) MCA Manager Keith Oliver UK HM Coastguard SAR Resources keith.oliver@mcga.gov.uk (observer) MCA Manager Peter Blackhurst - UK Inmarsat Head, Maritime Peter_blackhurst@inmarsat.com (observer) Safety Services Brian Mullan - UK Inmarsat brian@mullan.com (observer) Advisor David Fuhrmann USA US Air Force RCC SAR Program david.fuhrmann@tyndall.af.mil (aeronautical member) Manager Dave Edwards USA US Coast Guard International SAR david.l.edwards@uscg.mil (maritime member) Expert Cheryl Bertoia Cospas-Sarsat Principal Operations cheryl.bertoia@cospas-sarsat.int Cospas-Sarsat (observer) Officer/Deputy Head Andy Fuller IMSO Deputy Director andy_fuller@imso.org (observer) General Udo Fox IMRF Chief Executive fox@seenotretter.de (observer) Officer German Maritime Search and Rescue Service Pierre Watrin Maritime Safety & pierre.watrin@iridium.com (observer) CIRM Security Hans van der Graaf IMO Secretary JWG hvanderg@imo.org Brian Day ICAO Secretary JWG bday@icao.int brianday@brianday.aero

32 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD APPENDIX B PROVISIONAL AGENDA FOR THE SIXTEENTH SESSION OF THE ICAO/IMO JOINT WORKING GROUP ON HARMONIZATION OF AERONAUTICAL AND MARITIME SEARCH AND RESCUE 1. Adoption of the agenda 2. Decisions of ICAO and IMO bodies related to the Joint Working Group work, for instance: - briefing on the outcome of COMSAR 13 and MSC 85 and 86; and - briefing on the outcome of ICAO activities. 3. Conventions, plans, manuals and other documents affecting SAR, for instance: - status of the Maritime SAR Convention and Annex 12 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation; - alignment of the IMO Area SAR Plans, GMDSS Master Plan and ICAO Regional Air Navigation Plans; - progress report on work by the ANC and provisions pertaining to airborne carriage of crash alert and signalling equipment; and - amendments to the IAMSAR Manual, including changes to facilitate use by training institutions. 4. SAR operational principles, procedures and techniques, for instance: - development of operational guidelines for safe and effective rescue operations, taking account of experience gained from past SAR events; - mass rescue operations, taking account of experiences gained from major disasters; - medical assistance in the context of SAR services; - effects of measures to enhance maritime and aeronautical security on SAR services, including the implementation of the Long-range Identification and Tracking (LRIT) system; and - development of new and revised procedural strategies for the practical provision of SAR services. 5. SAR system administration, organization and implementation methods, for instance: - regional SAR databases; - development of guidelines for sub-regional SAR organization; - quality assurance, systems improvement, needs assessment, risk management, safety management and resource allocation; - implementation and operation of the International SAR Fund ; and - evaluating the effect of various technical co-operation projects in conjunction with relevant governments, organizations and agencies with a view to assessing their impact on implementing and maintenance of effective SAR services.

33 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD 6. RCC/RSC equipment and facility designations and standards, for instance: - establishment of RCCs and in particular JRCCs; and - status of AIS and related systems in aeronautical and maritime SAR. 7. SAR communications, for instance: - status of the GMDSS; - status of aeronautical communications systems for distress and SAR; - status of the Cospas-Sarsat system; - future trends in SAR communications; and - non-gmdss Communications systems which may be used for maritime distress alerting. 8. SAR personnel staffing and training, for instance: - development of RCC Staff Certificates; and - development of joint SAR training courses based on the IAMSAR Manual. 9. Any other business 10. Draft terms of reference and provisional agenda for JWG Reports to ICAO and the COMSAR Sub-Committee

34 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD APPENDIX C TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE SIXTEENTH SESSION OF THE ICAO/IMO JOINT WORKING GROUP 1 This Joint Working Group (JWG) is established to develop recommendations and information to support the IMO Sub-Committee on Radiocommunications and Search and Rescue and/or ICAO, as appropriate, on any matters pertinent to harmonization of international maritime and aeronautical SAR. 2 The JWG will meet as necessary, subject to approval of the IMO Maritime Safety Committee and ICAO, with meetings supported by IMO and ICAO on an alternating basis. 3 Invitations to participate in the JWG will be submitted to respective Member and contracting States by both IMO and ICAO respectively. 4 Language services will not be provided during JWG meetings. 5 JWG meetings will generally take place annually about midway between meetings of the IMO Sub-Committee on Radiocommunications and Search and Rescue. 6 The JWG will provide an active interface between IMO and ICAO for harmonization of maritime and aeronautical SAR plans and procedures in accordance with the 1985 MoU between IMO and ICAO, and with Resolution 1 of the 1979 International Conference on Maritime Search and Rescue. 7 The JWG will review and develop proposals relating to harmonization in various matters including: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) provisions of conventions, plans, manuals and other documents affecting SAR; SAR operational principles, procedures and techniques; SAR system administration, organization and implementation methods; RCC/RSC equipment and facility designations and standards; SAR communications; and SAR personnel staffing and training. 8 Need for JWG continuation will be reviewed by IMO and ICAO on an ongoing basis; the JWG will be discontinued when either organization concludes the work is no longer cost-effective, and formally informs the other of its decision to discontinue.

35 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD APPENDIX D PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE IAMSAR MANUAL AS A CONSEQUENCE OF THE INTRODUCTION OF LONG-RANGE IDENTIFICATION AND TRACKING (LRIT) AND THE CESSATION OF MHZ PROCESSING BY COSPAS-SARSAT Proposed amendments to IAMSAR Volume I Page vii, Abbreviations and Acronyms Add AIS Automatic Identification System Page vii, Abbreviations and Acronyms Add LRIT Long-range Identification and Tracking Page viii, Abbreviations and Acronyms Add SRS Ship Reporting System Page viii, Abbreviations and Acronyms Add VMS Vessel Monitoring System Page viii, Abbreviations and Acronyms Add VTS Vessel Traffic Services Page ix, Glossary Add Automatic Identification System (AIS) A system used by ships and vessel traffic services (VTS), principally for identifying and locating vessels. Add Geographic Information System (GIS) A system which captures, stores, analyzes, manages, and presents data that is linked to location. Add Long-range Identification and Tracking (LRIT) A system which requires certain vessels to automatically transmit their identity, position and date/time at 6-hour intervals in accordance with SOLAS Chapter V Regulation Add Maritime Domain Awareness (MDA) The effective understanding of any activity associated with the maritime environment that could impact upon the security, safety, economy or environment. Add Ship Reporting System (SRS) Reporting systems which contribute to safety of life at sea, safety and efficiency of navigation and/or protection of the marine environment. They are established under SOLAS Chapter V regulation 11 or for SAR purposes under Chapter 5 of the International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue, Add Vessel Tracking A generic term applied to all forms of vessel track data derived from multiple sources such as ship reporting systems, AIS, LRIT, SAR aircraft, VMS and VTS. Add Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) A tracking system which provides for environmental and fisheries regulatory organizations to monitor the position, time at a position, course and speed of commercial fishing vessels.

36 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD Add Vessel Traffic Services (VTS) A marine traffic monitoring system established by harbor or port authorities to keep track of vessel movements and provide navigational safety in a limited geographical area. Page 2-4, paragraph 2.3.7, Table, Desired column Add Vessel tracking information including: AIS, LRIT, VMS and SRS Page 2-10, paragraph 2.7.2, At the end of first sentence after search plan Add: and gaining access to vessel tracking information such as AIS, LRIT, VMS used by fisheries and Ship Reporting Systems (SRS). Page 3-3, paragraph , at bottom of second column, Add: Vessel tracking systems (AIS, LRIT, VMS) Page 4-4 (a), Delete the last sentence which reads: Satellite beacons have demonstrated superior performance to those that alert on MHz. Page 4-8, paragraph , Amend title by Adding and Vessel Tracking after Ship Reports for SAR Page 4-8, Add new paragraph after paragraph As well as ship reporting systems, other vessel tracking systems and services are valuable for search and rescue. AIS, LRIT, VMS and Vessel Traffic Services (VTS) are all valuable sources of vessel position data and can be displayed to provide a surface picture (SURPIC). The surface picture can assist in the identification and location of suitable recue vessels and be used to locate potential rescue vessels. In accordance with SOLAS regulation V/19-1, Contracting Governments should make provision to receive LRIT vessel position data for SAR in accordance with applicable IMO guidance. Page 5-8, paragraph 5.4.4, dash point 7, after ship reporting systems Add: and vessel tracking systems Page 6-5, paragraph 6.5.3, after dash point 3, Add new dash point: provide access to ship reporting and vessel tracking systems (AIS, LRIT, VMS, VTS); Page C-3, Appendix C, paragraph C.5.2, third sentence, After Ship reporting systems Add: and vessel tracking systems enable Page G-3, Appendix G, paragraph G.6.1, Delete the second dash point referring to Inmarsat-E and reword G.6.1 to read: Maritime satellite Emergency Position Indicating Radio Beacons (EPIRBs) have been accepted into the GMDSS. These beacons operate on 406 MHz and may have a MHz final homing signal. The signals are relayed via Cospas-Sarsat satellites, local user terminals (LUTs) and mission control centres (MCCs) to SAR Points of Contact (SPOCs) which include RCCs. Page G-3, Appendix G, paragraph G.6.2, Delete the second sentence. Page G-3, Appendix G, paragraph G.7.2, third sentence, Delete A and E (E is the EPIRB) and Add Mini-C and F77.

37 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD Proposed amendments to IAMSAR Volume II Page ix, Abbreviations and Acronyms Add: AIS Automatic Identification System Page xi, Abbreviations and Acronyms Add LRIT Long-range Identification and Tracking Page xiii, Abbreviations and Acronyms Add SRS Ship Reporting System Page xiv, Abbreviations and Acronyms Add VMS Vessel Monitoring System Page xiv, Abbreviations and Acronyms Add VTS Vessel Traffic Services Page xv, Glossary Add Automatic Identification System (AIS) A system used by ships and vessel traffic services (VTS), principally for identifying and locating vessels. Add Geographic Information System (GIS) A system which captures, stores, analyzes, manages, and presents data thaat is linked to location. Add Long-range Identification and Tracking (LRIT) A system which requires certain vessels to automatically transmit their identity, position and date/time at 6-hour intervals in accordance with SOLAS Chapter V Regulation Add Maritime Domain Awareness (MDA) The effective understanding of any activity associated with the maritime environment that could impact upon the security, safety, economy or environment. Add Ship Reporting System (SRS) Reporting systems which contribute to safety of life at sea, safety and efficiency of navigation and/or protection of the marine environment. They are established under SOLAS Chapter V regulation 11 or for SAR purposes under Chapter 5 of the International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue, SAR Convention. Add Vessel Tracking A generic term applied to all forms of vessel track data derived from multiple sources such as ship reporting systems, AIS, LRIT, SAR aircraft, VMS and VTS. Add Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) A tracking system which provides for environmental and fisheries regulatory organizations to monitor the position, time at a position, course and speed of commercial fishing vessels. Add Vessel Traffic Services (VTS) A marine traffic monitoring system established by harbor or port authorities to keep track of vessel movements and provide navigational safety in a limited geographical area. Page 1-4, Ship Reporting Systems, Add to heading and Vessel Tracking

38 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD Page 1-4, Add new paragraph, As well as ship reporting systems (SRS), RCCs can use vessel position data from various vessel tracking systems to support SAR operations. These may include the Long-range Identification and Tracking (LRIT) system, the Automatic Identification System (AIS) system, fisheries and other Vessel Monitoring Systems (VMS) and Vessel Traffic Services (VTS) established to monitor port operations or to cover focal areas or sensitive areas. Data from each of these systems can be displayed by RCCs using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) to produce a surface picture (SURPIC). SURPICS can be used to identify and locate potential rescue vessels as well as improve maritime domain awareness (MDA). In accordance with SOLAS regulation V/19-1, Contracting Governments should make provision to receive LRIT vessel position data for SAR. In accordance with IMO guidance material, RCCs can request LRIT data for SAR operations within their own SRR and for SAR coordination requirements outside it as appropriate. Data on all vessels can be requested within a circular or rectangular area at no charge to the RCC. Page 1-5, paragraph , Add to final sentence: and operate on 406 MHz and MHz for final homing. Page 1-13, paragraph , to Ship reporting systems for SAR Add: and Vessel tracking (AIS, LRIT, VMS and VTS) Page 1-17, After paragraph , Add new paragraph as follows: Display of Vessel Tracking Data. A computer system with Geographic Information System (GIS) display capability is important for displaying vessel tracking data sourced from AIS, LRIT, VMS, VTS and other sources. The location of SAR Units can also be tracked and displayed, as can search areas and other information. Page 2-5, paragraph 2.6.1, delete second point about Inmarsat-E. Reword the remainder to read: Maritime satellite Emergency Position Indicating Radio Beacons (EPIRBs) have been accepted into the GMDSS. These beacons operate on 406 MHz and may have a MHz final homing signal. The signals are relayed via Cospas-Sarsat satellites, local user terminals (LUTs) and mission control centres (MCCs) to SAR Points of Contact (SPOCs) which include RCCs. Page 2-5, paragraph 2.6.3, Delete second sentence. Page 2-5, paragraph 2.6.6, Delete final sentence in brackets. Page 2-6, paragraph 2.6.9, Delete whole paragraph. Page 2-6, paragraph , Delete whole paragraph. Page 2-6, paragraph 2.7.6, At start of first sentence after the word Inmarsat, Delete: -A and At the end of the last sentence, Delete: and E (E is the EPIRB) and Add after the letter M, Mini-C and F77. Page 2-8, paragraph 2.9.2, Delete second sentence about Inmarsat-E. Page 2-8, paragraph 2.9.4, Amend the first sentence to read: Many civil aircraft world-wide, especially operating over ocean areas, carry an ELT which operates on 406 MHz for alerting and MHz for final homing.

39 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD Third sentence. Delete the words: alert and, so that the sentence reads: Many ELTs also provide homing signals on 243 MHz.. Delete the final sentence. Alerting on MHz and MHz is no longer effective. Page 2-8, paragraph 2.9.7, first sentence, amend to read: When carried aboard vessels or other craft, EPIRBs can send signals on 406 MHz for alerting and and MHz for final homing. Delete the final sentence. Page 2-10, paragraph , amend the end of the first sentence to read: or a seven or nine digit identity for Inmarsat terminals. Delete the second last sentence. Page 2-10, paragraph , at the end of the paragraph, add the following: MMSIs are also used in the AIS for vessels, base stations, aids to navigation, SAR aircraft and AIS SARTs. The various platforms can be differentiated by reference to the MMSI format and from databases. Page 2-21, Add new paragraph 2.33 after paragraph Vessel Tracking Communications Various forms of communication can be used for vessel tracking. Ship reporting systems can use voice reporting over VHF and HF, DSC and Inmarsat. Many ship reporting systems use Inmarsat-C polling or Inmarsat automated position reporting (APR). AIS uses a time-division multiple access (TDMA) scheme to share the VHF frequency, also known as the VHF Data Link (VDL). There are two dedicated frequencies used for AIS AIS 1 ( MHz) and AIS 2 ( MHz). LRIT can employ any form of communication which meets the required functional specification, but most vessels use Inmarsat equipment to report every six hours to their Data Centre via a communications provider and application service provider. Vessel Monitoring Systems (VMS) can use various systems for tracking, including Inmarsat, Iridium and Argos. Page 3-6, paragraph 3.5.3(b), second paragraph, after the words ship reporting systems Add: and vessel tracking systems. Page 3-7, paragraph 3.5.9(c), Add second sentence as follows: Check vessel tracking systems (AIS, LRIT, VMS, VTS) for vessels which may be able to assist. Page B-7, Appendix B, Delete Sample MHz Initial Alert and the format. Page B-10, Appendix B, Delete Inmarsat-E Format. Proposed amendments to IAMSAR Volume III Section 1, page 1-4, Amend the heading Ship Reporting Systems to read Ship Reporting Systems and Vessel Tracking. Section 1, page 1-4, Add new dot point: Automatic Identification System (AIS) and Long-range Identification & Tracking (LRIT) transmissions are also important for providing shore authorities with vessel tracking data to support search and rescue. Section 2, page 2-2, top of page, delete 500 khz (radiotelegraphy).

40 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD Section 2, page 2-53, second dot point, delete 500 khz. Section 3, page 3-11, in table, Alerting frequencies, delete Inmarsat-E EPIRB MHz (earth to space). Section 3, page 3-13, second row from bottom of table, amend to read band. Section 3, page 3-37, last dot point, delete L-band is used for Inmarsat-E EPIRBs. Section 3, page 3-38, first dot point, delete 500 khz (telegraphy). Section 3, page 3-38, third dot point, delete and Inmarsat-E satellite. Section 4, page 4-4, second dot point, delete Inmarsat-E EPIRBs whose signals are relayed via Inmarsat satellites. Section 4, page 4-4, delete complete text of the last two dot points on page referring to Inmarsat-E. Section 4, page 4-5, delete complete text of the first dot point on page referring to Inmarsat-E.

41 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD APPENDIX E PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE IAMSAR MANUAL AS A CONSEQUENCE OF THE CESSATION OF 121.5MHZ SATELLITE MONITORING AND THE FULL IMPLEMENTATION OF THE GLOBAL MARITIME DISTRESS AND MONITORING SYSTEM Proposed amendments to IAMSAR Volume III 1 Glossary Page xi, make changes to the existing entry as follows (new text underlined, deletions strike through): Cospas-Sarsat System A satellite system designed to detect distress beacons transmitting on the frequencies of MHz and frequency of 406 MHz 2 Section 2 Page 2-2, make changes to the first bullet entry at the top as follows (deletions strike through): maintain a continuous watch on the associated distress frequencies, if equipped to do so: o 500 khz (radiotelephony) o 2182 khz (radiotelephony) o MHz FM (Channel 16, radiotelephony) for vessel distress o MHz AM (radiotelephony) for aircraft distress After 1 February 1999, Vessels subject to the SOLAS Convention must comply with applicable equipment carriage and monitoring requirements Page 2-53, delete text in the second bullet entry from the top: Delete 500 khz 3 Section 3 Page 3-11, make changes to the Table on page 3 11: Alerting row: Delete Inmarsat E MHz (earth to space) Maritime Safety Information (MSI) row: Delete footnote 8 on khz Renumber footnote 9 to number 8 on khz 8 Page 3-12, make changes at the bottom of page 3-12: 8 Delete Frequency 490 khz cannot be used for MSI employing NBDP transmission until 1 February Renumber footnote 9 to 8 Page 3-13, delete * from the khz* entry in the Table and its entire associated footnote shown as the second line from bottom of the page (deletions strike through): * For use after full implementation of GMDSS (1 February 1999). Page 3-37, delete last line of text on page 3-37 as follows (deletions strike through): L band is used for Inmarsat E EPIRBs.

42 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD Page 3-38, make changes to each of the four major bullet entries as follows (new text underlined, deletions strike through): First bullet from the top: Delete 500 khz (telegraphy) Second bullet: make changes to the second bullet from the top as follows (new text underlined, deletions struck through): Many civil aircraft worldwide, especially operating on international flights and over ocean areas, carry a MHz ELT for alerting and homing the 406 MHz distress beacon for alerting and homing. Some national regulations may allow for MHz distress beacons on domestic flights. o SAR aircraft should be able to home onon this frequency to locate survivors the MHz homing frequency on the 406 MHz distress beacon, and the capability exists to home on the 406 MHz signal itself. o an increasing number of ELTs use 406 MHz alerting signals with MHz or MHz or both for homing signals. Add new bullet 3: EPIRBs and ELTs operate on the 406 MHz frequency and are required to be carried on board certain vessels and aircraft, respectively. The 406 MHz PLB is not required internationally but can be carried on a person. Third bullet becomes bullet 4: 406 MHz ELTs and 406 MHz and Inmarsat E satellite EPIRBs distress beacons (ELTs, EPIRBs and PLBs) offer coded identities and other advantages which can reduce SAR response time by up to several hours over what would be possible with non coded ELTs beacons. Fourth bullet from the top: After January 1999: Additional capability on board vessels: Fourth bullet, second sub bullet: o Ships of 300 gross tons and over are not will no longer be required by SOLAS to carry radio apparatus for survival craft capable of transmitting and receiving on 500 khz (telegraphy) 2182 khz (telephony), but these frequencies this frequency can be expected to still be used. Page 3-39, make changes to the first bullet entry at the top of the page as follows (new text underlined, deletions struck through): EPIRB Distress beacon (ELT and EPIRB) signals indicate that a distress exists and facilitate location of survivors during SAR operations. To be effective, searching craft should be able to home on signals intended for this purpose, or on the alerting frequency itself (which will be non continuous if it is 406 MHz). 4 Section 4 Page 4-3, make changes to the first full bullet entry at the top of the page as follows: (new text underlined, deletions strike through): Use any one or more of the following international maritime distress frequencies to transmit a distress call: 500 khz (radio telegraphy), the use of which will be phased out when GMDSS is implemented 2182 khz (radiotelephony) MHz FM (VHF, channel 16) o any distress transmissions on the frequency 500 khz or 2182 khz could be preceded by the appropriate a digital selective call

43 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD o in remote oceans areas, the distress call should also be transmitted on a ship to shore HF circuit to a CRS, especially when distress calls on 500 khz, 2182 khz, or channel 16 are not replied to by other stations. Pages 4-4 and 4-5, make changes to the entire sub section called EPIRBS and ELTs as follows (new text underlined, deletions strike through): EPIRBs and ELTs, ELTs and Personal Locator Beacons (PLBs) Distress Beacons EPIRBs and ELTs, ELTs and PLBs are another means of alerting. They are distress beacons intended for alerting when other available means of alerting are inadequate. EPIRB: An EPIRB transmits a signal that alerts SAR authorities and allows rescue facilities to home in on the distressed vessel. o activated automatically upon exposure to the sea, or manually o 406 MHz EPIRB for use with Cospas Sarsat satellites and is required on board certain vessels o types of maritime satellite EPIRBs: 406 MHz satellite EPIRBs whose signals are relayed via Cospas-Sarsat satellites InmarsatE EPIRBs whose signals are relayed via Inmarsat satellites Non satellite VHF EPIRBs on channel 70, used close to shore in lieu of satellite EPIRBs where receiving stations are available. ELT: Most civil aircraft carry one of two types of ELT to alert SAR authorities to a distress situation. o 406 MHz satellite ELT intended for use with Cospas Sarsat satellites and is required on aircraft on international flights o MHz ELT might be allowed on domestic flights and is intended to be heard by high flying other aircraft. PLB: The 406MHz PLB is not a mandated international carriage requirement, but may be carried on a person and has similar characteristics to EPIRBs and ELTs. However the PLB has different specifications. Cospas Sarsat calculates the position information for EPIRBs and ELTs the 406 MHz distress beacons. Most ELTs and EPIRBs provide homing signals on MHz; some also use 243 MHz, and some EPIRBs may also integrate SARTs into their designs. Most EPIRBs and all ELTs are designed to activate automatically when a vessel sinks or an aircraft crashes (EPIRB alerts may indicate whether the beacon was activated automatically or manually). Some ELTs and EPIRBs may also have integral GPS capabilities. Inmarsat E EPIRBs transmit messages via Inmarsat geostationary satellites and CESs to RCCs. These beacons have registered coded signal identities. Position information from InmarsatE EPIRBs is derived either from integral equipment such as GPS, or via interfaces with shipboard navigation equipment (positions from shipboard equipment cannot be updated after the EPIRB floats free). InmarsatE EPIRB operates only within Inmarsat s coverage area, generally between 70 latitude north and south.

44 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD It is recommended that an activated EPIRB, even if inadvertently activated (false alarm), be kept on until the RCC is informed. o This enables the RCC to work with a more accurate position and identification, allowing resolution of the alert without dispatching SAR facilities needlessly. o Immediately attempt to notify the RCC by other means that the alert is false.

45 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD APPENDIX F UPDATED ANNEX 2 TO JWG-16/WP.10 OUTLINE STRUCTURE FOR UPDATED AND RESTRUCTURED IAMSAR MANUAL (Comments refer to IAMSAR Manual 2008 Edition with amendments through 2007) Location Abbreviations and Acronyms Front Section Glossary Communications Land SAR IAMSAR Manual in general Comment Add new internationally accepted terms, and national terms with international usage and which have good rationale for adoption. Add amendments section to include management of amendments and list of current pages Add new internationally accepted terms, and national terms with international usage and which have good rationale for adoption. Changes in communications technology and related systems have to be considered in all 3 Volumes. Content should be sufficient to allow ARCC staff to fully meet their responsibilities and to give them an affective understanding of specialist land SAR procedures. Location General Comment IAMSAR - Volume I Comment Content seems relevant and well-structured Paragraph Add more text about the Cospas-Sarsat International 406 MHz Beacon Registration Database (IBRD) Paragraph Appendix D Information Sources Appendix F Alerting and Locating Capability for New Mobile Satellite Systems Appendix G Mobile Communication Services Add a new paragraph on the Long-range Identification and Tracking (LRIT) system Verify, add or delete as necessary delete telephone, fax and information) Define what Primary SAR and Limited SAR mean. Should 9a and 9b combined? Define Basic Services and Enhanced Services. Is distance root-mean-square (drms) needed? Add the maritime automatic identification system (AIS) into G.4 or add as new G.9. Note HF use for and in polar regions.

46 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD Location General Comment Paragraph 1.11 Paragraph IAMSAR -Volume II Comment Restructure Volume II with respect to references to distress beacons and, in particular, PLBs that are not the subject of a mandated carriage requirement Add updates on new computer search planning tools Aircraft Coordinator as follows: review with a view to providing new content. Chapter 1 Consider restructuring this Chapter similar to the flow of Chapter 2 in Volume I Paragraph Chapter 2 Communications Consider expanding discussion on HF. (HF is taking on a more prominent role in maritime communications with HF and operations in polar regions increasing.) Review/update communications in general. RCCs need to be familiar with all the Inmarsat systems that may be used for SAR, not just those adopted into GMDSS ones used aboard aircraft might be addressed as well. Similarly, there should be mention of non- Inmarsat satellites systems that enjoy any substantial use by fishing vessels and other non-solas craft that might provide a means of ship-to-shore or shore-to-ship communication. A section on maritime automatic identification system (AIS) could be added. Section 2.10 Cellular Telephones Paragraphs Chapter 3 Consider new content on Land Search Planning and Search Techniques. Appendix O Ship Reporting Sys. Cell phone use for distress alerting is growing worldwide, review this section to see if it needs to be improved (guidance should remain general and that cellular systems vary geographically/globally. Verify if SarNET is being used/still exists; are there other similar systems to include? More structure and guidance with respect to SAR alerting procedures There are several short sections in the existing Chapter 5 that should be moved. A key topic to include is geo-referencing. Verify operational status and contact information Location General Comment IAMSAR Volume III Comment Convert text, wherever possible, to user friendly check lists and easily interpreted graphics

47 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD APPENDIX G ANNEX 1 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO IAMSAR MANUAL VOLUME II Add new last appendix: Appendix [X] Search Planning for MHz Distress Beacon Alerts 1. Searching for beacons is often difficult, and may be impossible without additional information. However, the methods in this Appendix should be followed as practicable. 2. Search planning for MHz beacon alerts typically result from reports received from commercial aircraft flying at high altitude. The beacon could be located anywhere within a large search area. Reports might also be received via low-flying aircraft and ground stations. The methods that follow will help define and reduce beacon search areas. Maximum detection ranges for beacon signals are assumed to be limited by line-of-sight. 3. Figure 1 depicts the geometry when an aircraft receives a beacon signal, and shows labelling used in planning a search for the beacon. However, potential scenarios discussed in the cautionary notes below may limit the applicability of Figure 1 and should be taken into account when deemed appropriate. CAUTIONARY NOTES: Only a single report and reporting aircraft location might be received. Unless the aircraft can provide additional information, the search area would have to be assumed to include the area within a single circle centered on the reporting aircraft s location. Reports of first heard and last heard information may not be accurate. The person monitoring the radio may not immediately hear or recognize the MHz distress beacon swept tone, causing the reported time and location to be incorrect. The beacon may have started transmitting after the reporting aircraft was already well within the maximum detection range, or the beacon may cease transmitting well before the aircraft is beyond the maximum detection range. Try to determine whether the signal: seemed strong when first acquired and then faded; was getting stronger and then abruptly ceased; or started suddenly, stopped suddenly, and seemed to be about the same strength the whole time it was heard. In such cases, the search planning procedure in this Appendix should still work, although the overlapping area where the two circles intersect will be enlarged; the centers of the circles would be closer together than they would be if signal acquisition and loss were solely due to the reporting aircraft coming within and then moving beyond maximum detection range while the beacon was transmitting. As a part of the report data gathering process it should also be ascertained that the receiving radio was already on (did not receive the signal when it was first turned on) and that detection of the signal did not occur while squelch was being adjusted. These situations may occur when seeking reports from additional aircraft when they first turn on or adjust their radios to listen. In such cases, the position for the last heard point could be more useful that the position of when the beacon was first heard.

48 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD Reports from a single aircraft may occur at different altitudes or courses. Aircraft, particularly those under instrument flight rules, may be ascending, descending and/or changing course according to their flight plan and air route traffic control needs. The first heard and last heard reports could be from different altitudes or on different courses. For a course change, knowing the turn point would allow drawing another range circle to combine with the first heard and last heard generated range circles to more narrowly define the area. When the reports occur at different altitudes, range circles should be drawn for each altitude to identify their intersect points. The transmitting beacon antenna may have some height above sea level or above its surrounding terrain. The height of the sending antenna should be added to the height of the radio receiver when estimating the detection range. In areas involving an island, the island should be considered as a possible forced landing site. The first heard and last heard positions may be affected by the forced landing site's altitude and the terrain surrounding the site, which could block the signal in some directions. The radio horizon range circle may cross land. The altitude of the reporting aircraft should be assumed to be the aircraft altitude above that elevation of the terrain at the lowest land horizon rather than above sea level, as discussed below in this Appendix. The detected beacon may be aboard an in-flight aircraft, and the aircraft, course, speed or altitude could change. The procedures in this Appendix do not account for an in-flight beacon scenario, but the search planner should be aware that apparently conflicting data or unexpected search planning outcomes could be caused by this situation. P 1 Aircraft flight path PF H PL H d Reporting aircraft Where: PFH = point first heard PLH = point last heard d = horizon distance for radio reception at a given height of antenna (aircraft altitude) P 1 = Intersect position one P 2 = Intersect position two Figure 1 - Geometry where reporting aircraft passes within reception range of beacon signal SEARCH PLANNING PROCEDURE P 2 4. Record reported data. Use Table 1 to record data received about a transmitting MHz beacon. Of all data collected about the beacon signal, the position and height of the receiving antenna for points first heard (PFH) and last heard (PLH) are most important.

49 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD Note: Obviously, reports from multiple sources can help substantially in narrowing down the search area for a MHz beacon. The SAR Mission Coordinator (SMC) should use all reports, and also solicit additional reports from other aircraft in the area, either directly or via the appropriate flight services as appropriate. Aircraft should be asked to report their own altitudes and positions where the signal was first heard, when the maximum signals was heard, and when the signal faded or was lost. Flight services, communications authorities, maritime SAR authorities or others might also be able to obtain fixes or bearings on activated beacons. When receiving multiple reports, consider the possibility that more than one activated MHz beacon might be heard. The authorities might also be able to help locate and silence an inadvertently activated beacon. Point Date- Time Position (lat/long) Aircraft Altitude (h) (ft) Course (degrees true) PFH (first heard) N/S E/W PLH (last heard) N/S E/W Table MHz beacon alert report data 5. Plot the reporting aircraft track. Use a rhumb line or great circle navigation depending on the track being followed by the reporting aircraft, as depicted in Figure 2. NOTE: The geographic area used as an example in Figures 2, 3, 4, 5, 8 and 10 is Hawaii and the surrounding area. The illustration shows a Lockheed C-130 search aircraft from Air Station Barbers Point in response to a report from an aircraft at high altitude, but similar plots could be developed for any area and other situations.

50 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD Figure 2 - Plot of PFH and PLH 6. Plot the radio horizons. Compute and plot the distance to the radio (VHF/UHF) horizon for the reporting aircraft at PFH and PLH. a. The radio horizon distance is estimated using Table 3 at the end of this appendix or by using the following equation: d h Where: h is the antenna height in feet above the water (e.g., mean sea level) or above ground level (AGL); and d is the Radio Horizon Distance (reception range) for the reporting aircraft in nautical miles (nm). b. Use Table 3 and its associated equations to determine the radio range to the horizon from a receiving antenna at various altitudes, where the altitude is measure above Mean Sea Level (MSL) in oceanic environments. If the elevation of the horizon varies in different directions from the aircraft, perfect circles will not accurately represent the potential areas containing the beacon. The conservative approaches are as follows: When the horizon is only partly over an oceanic area, plot a circle using altitude above MSL; When the horizon is entirely over land, use the Above Ground Level (AGL) altitude, where AGL is the altitude of the reporting aircraft above the elevation of the horizon at its lowest point; and

51 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD Be aware that over jungle areas, mountainous terrain, or where similar signal obstructions exist, the radio detection range may be as little as one-tenth of the horizon range (in mountainous terrain or areas covered with dense vegetation, the range of the signal will be reduced considerably compared to the range over water or flat land as discussed in the IAMSAR Manual, Volume 2, Section 5.6.) c. Record the results in Table 2 below. Point PFH Aircraft Altitude (h) (ft) Radio Horizon Distance (d) (nm) PLH Table 2 - Radio horizon distance d. Draw circles centered on the PFH and PLH with a radius equal to the computed radio horizon distance for each point at the given altitude for each as recorded in Table 2 (shown in Figure 3). Figure 3 - Plot of computed radio horizon distances for PFH and PLH 7. Plot the intersect line. The circles should intersect in two places. Draw a line between the two points where the circles intersect. This line will bisect the line connecting PFH and PLH positions as indicated in Figure 4.

52 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD Figure 4 - Plot of the intersect line 8. Plan the search. With only a single report from a high-flying aircraft and the associated long distances, large search areas will result and search options will be limited. a. Generally, with a single report, an electronic search will be needed to attempt to reacquire and home on the beacon signal. An electronic search can often be accomplished reasonably fast with a single aircraft SAR unit (SRU) search track. b. The aircraft SRU should proceed to the nearest point where the two circles intersect and then fly at a high altitude to the other point where the two circles intersect as illustrated in Figure 5. This should allow the beacon signal to be detected so the SRU can home on it.

53 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD Figure 5 - Aircraft SRU search down the intersect line at an altitude of 10,000 feet with a radio horizon range of 123 nm. NOTE: The other two blue legs are flight from the base to commence search point (CSP) and also return to base from the second intersection point/end of the intersect line. c. The area where the two circles overlap could also be covered with a multi-leg track line pattern. This might be necessary if the maximum altitude of the SRU limits its detection range to less than half the width of the overlapping area of the two circles. A parallel sweep or creeping line search pattern could also be used as discussed in Section 5.6 of this Volume of the IAMSAR Manual. 9. Reporting aircraft position. When the reporting aircraft passes directly over or nearly over the beacon position as shown in Figure 6, the search aircraft may proceed along the reporting aircraft s trackline. This special case is indicated when the distance over which the beacon was heard is twice (or nearly so) the radio horizon distance d. However, if the reporting aircraft was not near the beacon position and the search aircraft s altitude is substantially lower than the reporting aircraft s altitude, a simple trackline electronic search may provide inadequate coverage to detect the beacon signal. a. As shown in Figures 7 and 8, with the reporting aircraft at 30,000 feet and the search aircraft at 10,000 feet, two primary locations would be missed by a search along the reporting aircraft s track; even a search at 20,000 feet would not cover the entire area. b. In most situations it would be best to search along the intersect line (Figures 5 and 9), with the search aircraft at 10,000 feet.

54 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD c. If searching along and perpendicular to the track does not succeed, a decision will be needed on if conducting a multiple leg track search is warranted based on all available information. d Aircraft flight path PF H d P 1 P 2 d PL H Reporting aircraft Where: PFH = point first heard PLH = point last heard d = horizon distance for radio reception at a given height of antenna (aircraft altitude) P 1 = Intersect position one P 2 = Intersect position two Figure 6 - Basic geometry for special case where reporting aircraft passes directly over the beacon position P 1 d Aircraft flight path PF H PL H Search Aircraft Reporting aircraft Search aircraft Radio Sweep Width Where: PFH = point first heard PLH = point last heard d = horizon distance for radio reception at a given height of antenna (aircraft altitude) P 1 = Intersect position one P 2 = Intersect position two P 2 Figure 7 - Search aircraft at lower altitude than reporting aircraft same track; beacon signal not heard

55 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD Figure 8 - Search aircraft at 10,000 feet, reporting aircraft at 30,000 feet same track; beacon signal not heard Search aircraft Radio Sweep Width P 1 Aircraft flight path PF H PL H d Reporting aircraft Where: PFH = point first heard PLH = point last heard d = horizon distance for radio reception at a given height of antenna (aircraft altitude) P 1 = Intersect position one P 2 = Intersect position two P 2 Search Aircraft Figure 9 - Searching the intersect line by search aircraft at lower altitude than the reporting aircraft.

56 ICAO/IMO JWG-SAR/16 SD Visual search. If no beacon signal is detected by the search aircraft conducting an electronic search or by other high-flying aircraft, a visual search will usually be impractical based on a single report. A visual search may be practical when the report comes from a low-flying aircraft which results in a smaller search area. If no other information is available besides a single report, the SMC should follow the SAR agency s guidance for responding to uncorrelated reports. 11. Multiple Reports. Multiple reports make it easier to reduce the area of the probable location for the distress beacon. (This situation is very similar to uncorrelated distress calls on VHF-FM and the reception by multiple radio towers (without direction finding).) a. Plot each report; identify the intersections and areas of overlap of the pairs of radio horizon circles; and, eliminate those areas not covered by the multiple reports. b. Figure 10 shows a plot of reports from two aircraft. The first report is from an aircraft at 30,000 feet on a course of 060 degrees T, and the second report is from a descending aircraft on a course of 242 degrees T from 20,000 feet to 10,000 feet when the signal is last heard. (The smaller search area in this case would reduce the search time needed for an electronic search and could result in a reasonable visual search.) Figure 10 - Plot of PFH, PLH and respective radio horizon range circles; Hifly at 30,000 feet and course of 060 degrees T; Hifly2 at 20,000 feet and descending to 10,000 feet and course of 242 degrees T.