曝光臺 注意防騙 網(wǎng)曝天貓店富美金盛家居專營店坑蒙拐騙欺詐消費者

receiver as outlined in Annex 10, Volume I and the specifications of RTCA/DO-229C, as amended by United States FAA
TSO-C145A/TSO-C146A (or equivalent).
Note 2.— The term “GBAS receiver” designates the GNSS avionics that at least meet the requirements for a GBAS
receiver as outlined in Annex 10, Volume I and the specifications of RTCA/DO-253A, as amended by United States FAA
TSO-C161 and TSO-C162 (or equivalent).
Annex 10 — Aeronautical Communications Volume I
23/11/06 ATT D-4
3.3 Integrity and time-to-alert
3.3.1 Integrity is a measure of the trust that can be placed in the correctness of the information supplied by the total
system. Integrity includes the ability of a system to provide timely and valid warnings to the user (alerts) when the system
must not be used for the intended operation (or phase of flight).
3.3.2 To ensure that the position error is acceptable, an alert limit is defined that represents the largest position error
allowable for a safe operation. The position error cannot exceed this alert limit without annunciation. This is analogous to
ILS in that the system can degrade so that the error is larger than the 95th percentile but within the monitor limit.
3.3.3 The integrity requirement of the navigation system for a single aircraft to support en-route, terminal, initial
approach, non-precision approach and departure is assumed to be 1 – 1 × 10–5 per hour.
3.3.4 For satellite-based navigation systems, the signal-in-space in the en-route environment simultaneously serves a
large number of aircraft over a large area, and the impact of a system integrity failure on the air traffic management system
will be greater than with traditional navigation aids. The performance requirements in Chapter 3, Table 3.7.2.4-1, are
therefore more demanding.
3.3.5 For precision approach operations, integrity requirements for GNSS signal-in-space requirements of Chapter 3,
Table 3.7.2.4-1, were selected to be consistent with ILS requirements.
3.4 Continuity of service
3.4.1 Continuity of service of a system is the capability of the system to perform its function without unscheduled
interruptions during the intended operation.
3.4.2 En-route
3.4.2.1 For en-route operations, continuity of service relates to the capability of the navigation system to provide a
navigation output with the specified accuracy and integrity throughout the intended operation, assuming that it was available
at the start of the operation. The occurrence of navigation system alerts, either due to rare fault-free performance or to failures,
constitute continuity failures. Since the durations of these operations are variable, the continuity requirement is specified as a
probability on a per-hour basis.
3.4.2.2 The navigation system continuity requirement for a single aircraft is 1 – 1 × 10–4 per hour. However, for satellitebased
systems, the signal-in-space may serve a large number of aircraft over a large area. The continuity requirements in
Chapter 3, Table 3.7.2.4-1, represent reliability requirements for the GNSS signal-in-space, i.e. they derive mean time between
outage (MTBO) requirements for the GNSS elements.
3.4.2.3 A range of values is given in Chapter 3, Table 3.7.2.4-1, for the signal-in-space continuity requirement for
en-route operations. The lower value is the minimum continuity for which a system is considered to be practical. It is
appropriate for areas with low traffic density and airspace complexity. In such areas, the impact of a navigation system
failure is limited to a small number of aircraft, and there is, therefore, no need to increase the continuity requirement
significantly beyond the single aircraft requirement (1 – 1 × 10–4 per hour). The highest value given (i.e. 1 – 1 × 10–8 per
hour) is suitable for areas with high traffic density and airspace complexity, where a failure will affect a large number of
aircraft. This value is appropriate for navigation systems where there is a high degree of reliance on the system for
navigation and possibly for dependent surveillance. The value is sufficiently high for the scenario based on a low
probability of a system failure during the life of the system. Intermediate values of continuity (e.g. 1 – 1 × 10–6 per hour)
are considered to be appropriate for areas of high traffic density and complexity where there is a high degree of reliance
on the navigation system but in which mitigation for navigation system failures is possible. Such mitigation may be
Attachment D Annex 10 — Aeronautical Communications
through the use of alternative navigation means or the use of ATC surveillance and intervention to maintain separation
standards. The values of continuity performance are determined by airspace needs to support navigation where GNSS has
　
中國航空網(wǎng) www.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：附件10--航空電信an10_v1_6ed下(76)