Cospas-Sarsat specification summaries moved to reference/ for internal use only. Links updated to point to official cospas-sarsat.int site. The extracted images remain in public/ for use in other pages.
1548 lines
80 KiB
Markdown
1548 lines
80 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
title: "R025: Draft Prelim. Issue A"
|
|
description: "Official Cospas-Sarsat R-series document R025"
|
|
sidebar:
|
|
badge:
|
|
text: "R"
|
|
variant: "note"
|
|
# Extended Cospas-Sarsat metadata
|
|
documentId: "R025"
|
|
series: "R"
|
|
seriesName: "Reports"
|
|
documentType: "report"
|
|
isLatest: true
|
|
documentDate: "October 2025"
|
|
originalTitle: "C/S R.025 - Draft Prelim. Issue A"
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
> **📋 Document Information**
|
|
>
|
|
> **Series:** R-Series (Reports)
|
|
> **Date:** October 2025
|
|
> **Source:** [Cospas-Sarsat Official Documents](https://www.cospas-sarsat.int/en/documents-pro/system-documents)
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
COSPAS-SARSAT TWO-WAY COMMUNICATION
|
|
OPERATIONAL CONCEPT AND HIGH-LEVEL
|
|
REQUIREMENTS
|
|
C/S R.025
|
|
Draft Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
COSPAS-SARSAT TWO-WAY COMMUNICATION
|
|
OPERATIONAL CONCEPT AND HIGH-LEVEL REQUIREMENTS
|
|
HISTORY
|
|
Issue
|
|
Revision
|
|
Date
|
|
Comments
|
|
Preliminary A
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
Approved by CSC-73
|
|
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
TABLE OF CONTENTS
|
|
Page
|
|
History.............................................................................................................................................. i
|
|
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................ ii
|
|
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ xv
|
|
List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. xvi
|
|
1.
|
|
INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 1-1
|
|
1.1
|
|
Overview ..................................................................................................................... 1-1
|
|
1.2
|
|
Background ................................................................................................................ 1-1
|
|
1.3
|
|
Objectives ................................................................................................................... 1-2
|
|
1.4
|
|
Key Stakeholders ....................................................................................................... 1-2
|
|
1.5
|
|
Reference Documents ................................................................................................ 1-3
|
|
1.6
|
|
Terms, Abbreviations, and Definitions .................................................................... 1-3
|
|
2.
|
|
TWC OPERATIONAL CONCEPT .......................................................................... 2-1
|
|
2.1
|
|
Overview ..................................................................................................................... 2-1
|
|
2.2
|
|
Information Flow ....................................................................................................... 2-2
|
|
2.3
|
|
TWC-Capable Beacons ............................................................................................. 2-3
|
|
2.4
|
|
Distress cancellation by TWC .................................................................................. 2-4
|
|
3.
|
|
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES .......................................................................... 3-1
|
|
3.1
|
|
The Programme ......................................................................................................... 3-1
|
|
3.2
|
|
TWC Service Provider(s) .......................................................................................... 3-2
|
|
3.3
|
|
Beacon Manufacturer(s) ........................................................................................... 3-2
|
|
3.4
|
|
Test Facilities ............................................................................................................. 3-3
|
|
3.5
|
|
National Administrations.......................................................................................... 3-3
|
|
4.
|
|
GENERAL GUIDELINES TO TWC-SERVICE PROVIDERS,
|
|
ADMINISTRATIONS AND MANUFACTURERS ................................................. 4-1
|
|
4.1
|
|
SGB Coding Associated with TWC ......................................................................... 4-1
|
|
4.1.1
|
|
C/S FLAM with Rotating Field \#4 .................................................................... 4-1
|
|
4.1.2
|
|
Questions, Answers and Instructions ................................................................. 4-4
|
|
4.1.3
|
|
TWC Database Format Definition ..................................................................... 4-7
|
|
4.1.4
|
|
Return Link Message for TWC .......................................................................... 4-9
|
|
4.1.5
|
|
GNSS On-Times .............................................................................................. 4-10
|
|
4.2
|
|
TWC Considerations for SGB Registries .............................................................. 4-11
|
|
4.3
|
|
TWC Beacon User Interface .................................................................................. 4-11
|
|
4.4
|
|
SAR-User Interface ................................................................................................. 4-11
|
|
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
4.5
|
|
TWC Beacon Type Approval ................................................................................. 4-12
|
|
4.6
|
|
TWC Message Dataset Validation ......................................................................... 4-13
|
|
4.6.1
|
|
TWC message Dataset Validation Principles .................................................. 4-13
|
|
4.6.2
|
|
TWC message Dataset Validation Process ...................................................... 4-13
|
|
4.7
|
|
Beacon Design Guidelines ....................................................................................... 4-14
|
|
5.
|
|
TWC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ........................................................................... 5-1
|
|
5.1
|
|
Assumptions and Dependencies ............................................................................... 5-1
|
|
5.2
|
|
Implementation Steps ................................................................................................ 5-2
|
|
5.3
|
|
TWC Pilot Capability ............................................................................................... 5-2
|
|
5.4
|
|
Initial Operational Capability (IOC) ....................................................................... 5-3
|
|
5.5
|
|
Full Operational Capability (FOC) ......................................................................... 5-4
|
|
6.
|
|
TWC HIGH LEVEL REQUIREMENTS ................................................................. 6-1
|
|
6.1
|
|
Integrity ...................................................................................................................... 6-1
|
|
6.2
|
|
Availability ................................................................................................................. 6-1
|
|
6.3
|
|
Latency ....................................................................................................................... 6-1
|
|
6.4
|
|
TWC Coverage .......................................................................................................... 6-2
|
|
6.5
|
|
Security ....................................................................................................................... 6-2
|
|
6.6
|
|
Archiving .................................................................................................................... 6-2
|
|
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
LIST OF FIGURES
|
|
Figure 4-1: TWC Rotating Field FLAM bit allocation when Answer Format Flag bit is set to 0
|
|
(Short Answer) ..................................................................................................... 4-2
|
|
Figure 4-2: TWC Rotating Field FLAM bit allocation when Answer Format Flag bit is set to 1
|
|
(Long Answer) ..................................................................................................... 4-2
|
|
Figure 4-3: Answer Field in the Q/A Slot with up to 15 Possible Answers ................................ 4-6
|
|
Figure 4-4: Example Encoding of the User's Choice of Multiple Answers in the Answer Field of
|
|
the Long Answer Format ...................................................................................... 4-6
|
|
[Figure 4-5: CSV Database Format That Might be Used to Host The Different Versions of the
|
|
Dataset] ................................................................................................................. 4-8
|
|
Figure 4-6: RLM Type-3 bit allocation ....................................................................................... 4-9
|
|
Figure 4-7: Possible Spectrum of TWC Integration of Functionality into Beacons .................. 4-15
|
|
Figure A-1: Summary of the data exchange between SAR authorities and beacon ................... A-1
|
|
Figure A-2 - Answers to initial questions ................................................................................... A-2
|
|
Figure A-3 - Answers to follow-on questions from SAR Authorities ........................................ A-3
|
|
Figure A-4 - Delayed answers from the user .............................................................................. A-4
|
|
Figure A-5 - Instructions/information message .......................................................................... A-6
|
|
Figure A-6 - User not answering initial questions ...................................................................... A-7
|
|
Figure B-7 - Example of the CSV Database Format with a Portion of the Current Database] .. B-2
|
|
|
|
1-1
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
1.
|
|
INTRODUCTION
|
|
1.1
|
|
Overview
|
|
This document outlines the Cospas-Sarsat Programme's operational concept and high-level
|
|
requirements for Two-Way Communication (TWC). This capability will be an optional Second
|
|
Generation Beacon (SGB) feature. Due to restrictions on the use of the Cospas-Sarsat assigned 406
|
|
MHz frequency band, the Cospas-Sarsat TWC capability will be reserved for use for search and
|
|
rescue purposes. To enhance the capabilities of the Cospas-Sarsat System, the Programme is
|
|
planning to introduce a TWC capability which is limited to the exchange of information between the
|
|
beacon user and SAR authorities.
|
|
Cospas-Sarsat TWC will be implemented through a collaborative and shared effort among the
|
|
International Cospas-Sarsat Programme, Two-Way Communication Service Providers (TWC SPs),
|
|
national authorities and beacon manufacturers. The objective will be to provide Search and Rescue
|
|
(SAR) authorities with an optional capability to gain additional information about a distress event
|
|
and provide instructions. This optional capability will be achieved by implementing bi-directional
|
|
communications between the beacon user and the SAR authorities. Under this optional capability,
|
|
the SAR authorities will be able to send pre-defined questions and instructions to the beacon user
|
|
via a TWC-SP. The beacon user will be able to send pre-defined answers to questions to the SAR
|
|
authorities via a modified 406 forward link alert message (FLAM).
|
|
1.2
|
|
Background
|
|
In 2020, following the implementation of the Cospas-Sarsat Type 1 Return Link Service (RLS)
|
|
capability, the European Commission (EC) proposed an enhancement of the RLS capability to
|
|
enable information to be passed between SGBs and Rescue Coordination Centres (RCCs). The
|
|
proposed goal of this optional capability was to enable rescue services to retrieve valuable
|
|
information from or give instructions to the persons in distress in order to organize and perform
|
|
the rescue mission in a more efficient and safe manner.
|
|
At CSC-67 the Council decided "to invite participants to work intersessionally, including in an
|
|
informal correspondence working group to assess TWC capabilities in the Cospas-Sarsat System".
|
|
The EC led a Correspondence Working Group on TWC which was held from January to April
|
|
2023 resulting in several papers being submitted to JC-37.
|
|
The submissions revealed that there was not yet agreement on the Programme's high-level
|
|
strategic vision. As a result, a Plenary splinter group was struck that developed the high-level
|
|
strategic vision depicted in Figure 2-1 below. The group, with further iteration intersessionally as
|
|
part of the Correspondence Working Group, generally agreed that:
|
|
- There are likely to be multiple TWC-SPs, potentially regionally based, making it essential
|
|
that the Programme clearly articulate the mechanism and specification that will be common
|
|
to all TWC-SPs to interface to the Cospas-Sarsat System.
|
|
|
|
1-2
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
- The Cospas-Sarsat Programme will be responsible for ensuring that any TWC-SP linked
|
|
to the Programme meets the Cospas-Sarsat TWC high-level requirements provided in the
|
|
present document.
|
|
- Information presented to the beacon user will be split between an initial automated question
|
|
set and a follow-on question/instruction set selected by the SAR authority.
|
|
- The initial set of pre-defined questions to the beacon user and possible answers provided
|
|
by the beacon user are a core Cospas-Sarsat capability and will remain the responsibility
|
|
of the Programme. The answers provided by the beacon users to the initial questions will
|
|
be automatically sent to SAR authorities.
|
|
- The development and management of the SAR TWC Interface (Web Interface or similar
|
|
method) which supports the follow-on pre-defined questions, possible answers and
|
|
possible instructions from the SAR authority to the beacon user will be the responsibility
|
|
of the TWC-SPs. SAR authorities wishing to access this capability will do so through a
|
|
SAR TWC interface operated by the TWC-SPs.
|
|
1.3
|
|
Objectives
|
|
The goal of this document is to guide the implementation of a Cospas-Sarsat-based TWC
|
|
capability. Given that Cospas-Sarsat supports SAR stakeholders worldwide, the Programme
|
|
should anticipate the eventual participation of multiple TWC-SPs. In order to ensure
|
|
interoperability, a common framework and interface between the TWC-SPs and the Cospas-Sarsat
|
|
System will be essential. This document provides the Cospas-Sarsat TWC framework and outline
|
|
of the roles and responsibilities of stakeholders.
|
|
The Programme's objectives in introducing a TWC capability are to:
|
|
a) Enhance the Cospas-Sarsat Programme's ability to conduct its current mission of providing
|
|
accurate, timely and reliable distress alert and location data to help SAR authorities assist
|
|
persons in distress through the addition of an optional two-way communications capability.
|
|
b) Introduce a capability that is focussed on the needs of SAR authorities while recognizing
|
|
that the first step in providing that support is to encourage the carriage of a beacon by
|
|
facilitating the production of a product (beacon) that is appealing to the beacon consumer.
|
|
c) Introduce an optional message-based TWC capability focused on enhancing the SAR
|
|
responders' situational awareness.
|
|
The Programme may consider the introduction of a capability which, subject to technical
|
|
limitations, could support limited free text messaging in special-use beacons.
|
|
1.4
|
|
Key Stakeholders
|
|
The Cospas-Sarsat TWC capability will involve a collaborative effort between:
|
|
- The Programme
|
|
- TWC Service Providers
|
|
|
|
1-3
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
- Beacon Manufacturers
|
|
- National Authorities
|
|
-
|
|
Response Organizations/SAR Authorities
|
|
-
|
|
Beacon Regulatory Authorities
|
|
For stakeholder roles and responsibilities see section 3.
|
|
1.5
|
|
Reference Documents
|
|
a) Cospas-Sarsat Document C/S P.011, "Cospas-Sarsat Programme Management Policy".
|
|
b) Cospas-Sarsat Document C/S P.016, "Cospas-Sarsat Strategic Plan".
|
|
c) Cospas-Sarsat Document C/S G.003, "Introduction to the Cospas-Sarsat System".
|
|
d) Cospas-Sarsat Document C/S G.008, "Operational Requirements for Cospas-Sarsat Second-
|
|
Generation 406-MHz Beacons".
|
|
e) Cospas-Sarsat Document C/S S.011, "Cospas-Sarsat Glossary".
|
|
f) Cospas-Sarsat Document C/S T.018, "Specification for Second-Generation Cospas-Sarsat
|
|
406-MHz Distress Beacons".
|
|
g) Cospas-Sarsat Document C/S T.021, "Second-Generation Cospas-Sarsat 406-MHz Distress
|
|
Beacons Type Approval Standard".
|
|
h) Cospas-Sarsat Document C/S A.001, "Cospas-Sarsat Data Distribution Plan (DDP)".
|
|
i) Cospas-Sarsat Document C/S A.002, "Cospas-Sarsat Mission Control Centres Standard
|
|
Interface Description (SID)".
|
|
j) Cospas-Sarsat Document C/S A.005, 'Cospas-Sarsat Mission Control Centre Performance
|
|
Specification and Design Guidance'.
|
|
1.6
|
|
Terms, Abbreviations, and Definitions
|
|
Specific terms, abbreviations, and definitions are included in document C/S S.011.
|
|
- END OF SECTION 1 -
|
|
|
|
2-1
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
2.
|
|
TWC OPERATIONAL CONCEPT
|
|
2.1
|
|
Overview
|
|
The Cospas-Sarsat TWC will be an optional capability that will enable beacon users to convey
|
|
additional information about their situation to SAR authorities and to respond to follow-on
|
|
questions that SAR authorities may elect to send. The envisioned concept will involve at least
|
|
two message sets. The first will be a series of pre-defined initial questions and possible answers
|
|
pre-programmed into the beacon, which will be presented to the beacon operator upon beacon
|
|
activation. The answers to these questions will be forwarded to the MCC in FLAMs to be
|
|
processed and sent directly to RCC/SPOCs and the TWC-SP. The Programme, in consultation
|
|
with SAR authorities and beacon manufacturers, will be responsible for developing and
|
|
maintaining this message set.
|
|
The second message set will be a set of pre-defined follow-on messages (e.g., questions, possible
|
|
responses, instructions, information, etc.) approved and maintained by the Programme but
|
|
developed by the TWC-SP in coordination with SAR authorities, beacon manufacturers and the
|
|
Programme. Beacon user responses arising from these follow-on messages will flow through the
|
|
MCC to the TWC-SP.
|
|
The TWC-SP will operate the interface between the SAR authorities and the TWC-SP in order to
|
|
allow SAR authorities to communicate with the beacon user via return link messages (RLM) sent
|
|
to the beacon using the TWC return link service.
|
|
Figure 2-1 depicts the conceptual flow of information and division of operational responsibilities.
|
|
|
|
2-2
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
Figure 2-1: TWC Conceptual Flow of Information and Division of Responsibilities
|
|
2.2
|
|
Information Flow
|
|
Once activated, a beacon will send its initial alert in accordance with current Cospas-Sarsat
|
|
specifications without delay. The beacon, even if TWC capable, will not wait for additional
|
|
information from the beacon user. This alert will be processed in accordance with the
|
|
specifications and procedures applicable for all alerts and, if the beacon is TWC-capable the TWC-
|
|
SP and the RLSP will be notified.
|
|
The TWC questions, answers and instructions data will use a new rotating field RF\#4 which will
|
|
alternate with RF\#0 (See Document C/S T.018) in the FLAM to transmit TWC information from
|
|
the beacon to SAR authorities.
|
|
Upon distress detection and localization by Cospas-Sarsat, the TWC-capable beacon will receive
|
|
an Acknowledgement RLM (Type 3 acknowledgement) from the TWC-SP via its associated RLSP
|
|
and will indicate it to the beacon user via an appropriate indicator.
|
|
If a beacon is TWC-capable, the beacon operator will be presented with a series of initial questions
|
|
and possible answers pre-programmed into the beacon. The beacon will include these initial
|
|
answers in the subsequent FLAM bursts, as soon as new information is provided. The beacon
|
|
information will indicate with which TWC-SP(s) it is associated. The initial FLAM will be
|
|
forwarded to RCCs/SPOCs in a standard SIT 185 message and include notification that the
|
|
|
|
2-3
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
activated device is TWC capable. As soon as available, initial answers will be sent to the RCCs
|
|
via a standard SIT 185. RCCs may notify SAR responders that the beacon has a TWC capability
|
|
and of the connection details for the SAR TWC interface. This same SAR TWC interface will
|
|
provide the initial answers as well.
|
|
Furthermore, all initial questions and answers and follow-on questions, answers and instructions
|
|
will be made available by the TWC-SP connected to SAR responders and authorities through a
|
|
SAR TWC interface. Follow-on TWC messages will flow through the standard Cospas-Sarsat
|
|
architecture (beacon to satellite to LUT to MCC) and then to the TWC-SP but should not require
|
|
any manual action by the MCC. If no new information is provided in the allocated TWC bits,
|
|
these messages should not be forwarded to the RCC.
|
|
After the beacon location is provided by the Cospas-Sarsat System, the FLAMs received by the
|
|
MCC shall be forwarded to the TWC-SP in order to keep the complete answers received available
|
|
to the RCC operator on the SAR TWC interface for a TWC beacon activation.
|
|
Communication with the beacon through the SAR TWC interface will start with the SAR
|
|
Authority selecting the activated beacon through the TWC-SP interface and initiating
|
|
communication with it. Additionally other authorized SAR users may be granted observer rights,
|
|
allowing them to monitor the communication, without being able to send information to the beacon
|
|
user.
|
|
Furthermore, the TWC-SP interface should be designed to prevent any user from restricting access
|
|
to the system, ensuring that all authorized users, as determined by national authorities, can utilize
|
|
the interface without interference or obstruction from others.
|
|
Follow on TWC messages will flow through the standard Cospas-Sarsat architecture (beacon to
|
|
satellite to LUT to MCC) and then to the TWC-SP, but should not require any manual action by
|
|
the MCC. Follow-on messages will not flow directly from the MCC to the RCC.
|
|
Access to the SAR TWC interface shall be restricted and require SAR authorities to register with
|
|
the TWC-SP in order to access the information.
|
|
2.3
|
|
TWC-Capable Beacons
|
|
See documents C/S G.008 for operational requirements and C/S T.018 for technical performance
|
|
specification details.
|
|
Second-generation beacons enabled with TWC functionality will:
|
|
a) receive and extract relevant information from return link messages contained in the RLS signal;
|
|
b) provide an interface for the beacon user to:
|
|
i.
|
|
Read and enter answers to questions presented (e.g., via multiple-choice
|
|
selections),
|
|
ii.
|
|
Read instructions from search and rescue authorities,
|
|
|
|
2-4
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
iii.
|
|
Provide updates on a distress situation, as required by SAR authorities;
|
|
c) have an embedded database of initial automatic questions and possible answers required by the
|
|
Cospas-Sarsat Programme that can be updated if a revised set of questions and/or answers are
|
|
made available;
|
|
d) upon activation present the initial set of Cospas-Sarsat Programme approved automatic questions
|
|
and possible answers to the beacon user; and
|
|
e) have an embedded database of follow-on questions, possible answers and instructions defined
|
|
by the TWC-SP (in accordance with the validation criteria approved by the Programme) and that
|
|
can be (optionally) updated if a revised set of questions, possible answers and instructions are
|
|
made available.
|
|
The user answers to the initial and follow-on questions are sent to the SAR authorities through the
|
|
Cospas-Sarsat system and to the TWC-SP.
|
|
National administrations are requested to provide in document C/S S.007 information regarding the
|
|
permitted use and coding of beacons with TWC capabilities, including any limitations.
|
|
Based on the available information in document C/S S.007, manufacturers are required to clearly
|
|
identify to the user at the time of purchase the geographic or regulatory limitations that may affect
|
|
the availability of TWC functionality in a beacon with that capability.
|
|
If the TWC capable beacon supports more than one TWC-SP, the method of selecting the TWC-SP
|
|
shall be described in the user manual.
|
|
A TWC capable beacon shall have local access to a dataset of pre-defined initial and follow on
|
|
questions, possible answers and instructions applicable to each TWC-SP with which it is
|
|
associated provided by the beacon manufacturer. These may be stored on the beacon, on a related
|
|
display tool or on a compatible smart device.
|
|
2.4
|
|
Distress cancellation by TWC
|
|
The TWC-capable beacon will allow the beacon user to inform the SAR authorities that the alert
|
|
was a false alert or that the distress situation ceased by prompting the user using the TWC beacon
|
|
interface, resulting in the activation of the standard SGB cancellation function.
|
|
If this distress cancellation answer is selected by the beacon user, a confirmation prompt will be
|
|
displayed and if confirmed, the beacon will automatically initiate the beacon activation
|
|
cancellation function as per document C/S T.018 section 4.5.7, including the transmission of
|
|
cancellation messages (Main Field and Rotating Field\#15). For the avoidance of doubt, the beacon
|
|
shall not transmit a response as a TWC message (i.e., not using RF\#4). Should the user not confirm
|
|
the cancellation, the beacon will continue to operate in its normal distress mode, and will redisplay
|
|
the previous TWC initial question.
|
|
Once the beacon activation cancellation function has started, the TWC interaction with the beacon
|
|
user and all further communication ceases.
|
|
|
|
2-5
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
The MCC receiving confirming cancellation messages shall also distribute the associated alert
|
|
message to the TWC SP destination, such that it can adjusts its operations appropriately if the same
|
|
TWC beacon is subsequently reactivated.
|
|
- END OF SECTION 2 -
|
|
|
|
3-1
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
3.
|
|
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
|
|
3.1
|
|
The Programme
|
|
The Cospas-Sarsat Programme will:
|
|
a) define the initial questions and possible answers to be encoded into all TWC capable beacons;
|
|
b) approve a set of validation criteria to ensure the adequacy of follow-on questions, possible
|
|
answers and instructions that will be offered in library form by TWC-SPs;
|
|
c) retain the responsibility for ensuring messages are compliant with the authorized use of the 406
|
|
MHz Band and therefore will be required to approve these message sets' adequacy according to
|
|
validation criteria defined in section 4.9 through the Validation Panel process;
|
|
d) enhance the Cospas-Sarsat system to enable the automatic transmission of a FLAM encoded
|
|
with initial questions and answers from the TWC capable beacon to the MCC;
|
|
e) enhance the Cospas-Sarsat system to enable the transmission of the first beacon alert message
|
|
with TWC information and the subsequent ones if non-redundant from the MCC to the TWC-
|
|
SP without delay;
|
|
f) enhance the Cospas-Sarsat system to decode the initial questions and answers from the TWC
|
|
capable beacon and transmit them to the RCC/SPOC as additional information in the SIT 185
|
|
message;
|
|
g) enhance the Cospas-Sarsat System to enable the transmission of a FLAM encoded with initial
|
|
questions and answers from the MCC to one or more TWC-SP, as appropriate;
|
|
h) enhance the Cospas-Sarsat System to enable the transmission of a FLAM from the beacon
|
|
through the MCC to one or more TWC-SP(s) of messages sent from the TWC-capable beacon
|
|
containing responses to follow-on questions that may be sent to the beacon user from SAR
|
|
authorities through the TWC-SP, as well as TWC message reception acknowledgements;
|
|
i) develop specifications for inclusion in appropriate Cospas-Sarsat documentation to establish
|
|
type-approval standards for beacons having TWC capabilities;
|
|
j) in collaboration with TWC Service Providers, define the System-level TWC test scenarios
|
|
required for the evaluation of the operational distribution of messages by the Cospas-Sarsat
|
|
Ground Segment from TWC-capable beacons including the prerequisites for their execution;
|
|
k) consider Beacon Type Approval applications and assign TACs;
|
|
l) host the TWC message dataset in all its official language translations;
|
|
m) consider the dataset validation panel's outcome for new dataset release; and
|
|
n) update the IBRD and/or TAC database to identify TWC beacons, if appropriate.
|
|
|
|
3-2
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
TWC Service Provider(s)
|
|
The TWC-Service Providers will:
|
|
a) propose follow-on TWC questions, possible answers and instructions, to be tabulated in library
|
|
format, in close collaboration with SAR authorities and in consultation with TWC beacon
|
|
manufacturers and submit to the Programme for review by the Validation Panel;
|
|
b) establish and operate a message-data processing capability and SAR TWC interface to receive,
|
|
store and make available to SAR authorities TWC questions, possible answers and instructions
|
|
to be exchanged with the TWC-capable beacons;
|
|
c) establish and operate a message-data processing facility to relay follow-on question and
|
|
instruction messages from SAR authorities to the TWC-capable beacon;
|
|
d) manage the registration of national SAR authorities and other authorized stakeholders as users
|
|
of the SAR TWC interface;
|
|
e) provide materials for the training of the SAR operators intending to utilize the SAR TWC
|
|
Interface;
|
|
f) ensure all registered SAR authorities and other properly authorized stakeholders have access
|
|
to the message-data processing and SAR TWC interface;
|
|
g) ensure adequate message-data processing and user-interface capacity for simultaneous access
|
|
to the SAR TWC interface by all relevant stakeholders;
|
|
h) adhere to Cospas-Sarsat standards, existing and as may be developed, for the initial questions
|
|
and answers;
|
|
i) in collaboration with the Cospas-Sarsat Programme, define the system level TWC test
|
|
scenarios required for the evaluation of the operational distribution of messages by the Cospas-
|
|
Sarsat Ground Segment for TWC-capable beacons including the prerequisites for their
|
|
execution; and
|
|
j) in collaboration with Cospas-Sarsat Programme, implement a new version of the TWC
|
|
message database when necessary, taking into account the SAR Authorities needs and
|
|
according to validation criteria approved by the Programme.
|
|
3.3
|
|
Beacon Manufacturer(s)
|
|
The Beacon Manufacturer(s) will:
|
|
a) develop TWC SGB beacons in compliance with applicable C/S specifications and other
|
|
applicable specifications with an initial focus on PLBs;
|
|
b) develop and program beacons with the agreed upon initial and follow-on TWC questions and
|
|
answers and the ability to receive instructions;
|
|
c) provide a way to update the TWC message database contained in the beacon or associated
|
|
product(s), if needed;
|
|
d) define beacon-user interface in coordination with applicable standards bodies; and
|
|
|
|
3-3
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
e) support the system level TWC tests conducted by the Programme and the TWC Service
|
|
Provider with beacon prototypes.
|
|
3.4
|
|
Test Facilities
|
|
The Test Facilities will:
|
|
a) provide a means to perform type approval testing TWC capable beacons according to
|
|
document C/S T.021 to ensure that they meet the C/S T.018 specifications; and
|
|
b) develop and implement a test bench capability allowing the testing of the TWC-related
|
|
capabilities of the TWC-capable beacons submitted by beacon manufacturers for Type
|
|
Approval Certification.
|
|
3.5
|
|
National Administrations
|
|
The National Administrations should consider the following:
|
|
a) register (i.e., enter into as service agreement) with the TWC Service Provider and determine
|
|
the permission level (active or monitor only) for national SAR authorities with access to the
|
|
SAR TWC interface;
|
|
b) collaborate with the TWC-SP for the definition of the SAR-User Interface requirements.
|
|
c) establish the national regulations for TWC-capable beacons, as necessary;
|
|
d) ensure the adequate training of the SAR operators allowed to use the SAR TWC interface;
|
|
e) limit access to the SAR TWC interface to trained and authorized operators;
|
|
f) provide an official translation of the TWC message database into any alternative language, if
|
|
desired, and submit for possible inclusion in the TWC message dataset;
|
|
g) review and consider updating the national beacon registry to allow the identification of TWC
|
|
capable beacons;
|
|
h) update the applicable portion of document C/S S.007 to advise the Programme of the national
|
|
regulations regarding TWC beacons; and
|
|
i) update document C/S S.007 to indicate the official translation(s) of the dataset appropriate for
|
|
potential use in their beacons.
|
|
- END OF SECTION 3 -
|
|
|
|
4-1
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
4.
|
|
GENERAL
|
|
GUIDELINES
|
|
TO
|
|
TWC-SERVICE
|
|
PROVIDERS,
|
|
ADMINISTRATIONS AND MANUFACTURERS
|
|
4.1
|
|
SGB Coding Associated with TWC
|
|
The following sections present the planned approach for implementing the RLS Type 3 Two-way
|
|
communication (TWC) messages. Much of the detailed information which follows, can also be found
|
|
in document C/S T.018 "Specification for Second-Generation Cospas-Sarsat 406-MHz Distress
|
|
Beacons". If there are any discrepancies between the information included in this document and the
|
|
information presented in document C/S T.018, the information in document C/S T.018 should take
|
|
precedence.
|
|
4.1.1
|
|
C/S FLAM with Rotating Field \#4
|
|
TWC Rotating Structure and Bit Allocation
|
|
The following data fields have been identified as being necessary in a RLS Type 3 TWC FLAM
|
|
(See document C/S T.018 "Specification for Second-Generation Cospas-Sarsat 406-MHz Distress
|
|
Beacons", Table 3.7 for further details):
|
|
Rotating Field Element
|
|
Bit Allocation
|
|
Rotating Field ID
|
|
4 Bits
|
|
TWC Provider ID
|
|
3 Bits
|
|
TWC
|
|
message
|
|
dataset
|
|
Version ID
|
|
5 Bits
|
|
RLM Type-3
|
|
Acknowledgement
|
|
1 Bit
|
|
Answer Format Flag
|
|
1 Bit
|
|
Spare Bit
|
|
1 Bit
|
|
TWC Q/I/A
|
|
33 Bits Either Short Answer Format or Long Answer
|
|
Format
|
|
Total
|
|
48 Bits
|
|
The new Rotating Field assigned for RLS Type 3 TWC (RF\#4) follows the bit allocation illustrated in
|
|
Figure 4-1 and Figure 4.2. (See document C/S T.018 "Specification for Second-Generation Cospas-
|
|
Sarsat 406-MHz Distress Beacons", Figures 4-2, and 4-3)
|
|
|
|
4-2
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
Figure 4-1: TWC Rotating Field FLAM bit allocation when Answer Format Flag
|
|
bit is set to 0 (Short Answer)
|
|
Figure 4-2: TWC Rotating Field FLAM bit allocation when Answer Format Flag
|
|
bit is set to 1 (Long Answer)
|
|
This assignment enables having three separate slots of 11 bits each, or one slot of 22 bits followed by
|
|
one slot of 11 bits, for Questions/Answers or Instructions / Reception Acknowledgements per burst.
|
|
The short answer format is intended to support only a single answer for a specific question. The long
|
|
answer format is intended to support selection of multiple answers for a specific question. Both formats
|
|
can support an instruction(s) with an acknowledgment(s).
|
|
Questions requiring a long answer format will be flagged in the dataset.
|
|
Each field of the TWC FLAM structure is described in the following subsections:
|
|
Rotating Field ID
|
|
Four bits are allocated to the Rotating Field identifier. For TWC Rotating Field the value is 0100
|
|
as defined in document C/S T.018 "Specification for Second-Generation Cospas-Sarsat 406-MHz
|
|
Distress Beacons", Table 3.7: TWC Rotating Field (\#4).
|
|
TWC Provider ID
|
|
Three bits have been allocated to identify the TWC service provider or TWC-SP. This allows for
|
|
a total of eight different service providers, which seems adequate considering that only three
|
|
potential service providers to date have been identified (i.e., BDS, Galileo, Glonass).
|
|
|
|
4-3
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
TWC Message Dataset Version ID
|
|
The Programme anticipates the need for several versions of the TWC message dataset over the lifetime
|
|
of the capability. Five bits are allocated for this purpose in order to allow for TWC message dataset
|
|
updates in case of modifications in the Questions/Answers/Instructions set. This allows for a total of
|
|
thirty-two different TWC message dataset versions which seems adequate considering that it is
|
|
unlikely that more than one version per year will be needed.
|
|
The TWC message dataset will be contained in a single database maintained by the Secretariat in
|
|
the three official Programme Languages. A complete version history of all approved TWC
|
|
message dataset versions shall be maintained and shall be made readily available to Programme
|
|
stakeholders (e.g., MCC, RCCs, National Administrations, etc.), beacon manufacturers and TWC-
|
|
SPs. Additional languages may be added once Participants provide official translations for
|
|
inclusion in document C/S [S.TBD]. The mechanism for how the datasets will be provided and
|
|
controlled is still TBD.
|
|
The different versions of the dataset shall be available on the Cospas-Sarsat and TWC-SP
|
|
websites. Updates of the dataset will not be obligatory for the beacon users, and the system must
|
|
support backward compatibility in the event that a beacon is using an out of date dataset. Beacon
|
|
manufacturers are expected to load beacons with the most up to date dataset(s) compatible with
|
|
the appropriate TWC-SP(s) at the time of sale.
|
|
Additionally, RCCs and MCCs shall be informed of any changes to the Initial questions which
|
|
should be implemented as a critical change for MCCs.
|
|
Updates of the versions will be notified by the Secretariat to the beacon manufacturers, the TWC-SPs
|
|
and the FMCC. The notification of the general public by beacon manufacturers should be left to their
|
|
discretion.
|
|
The notification to inform the MCCs of TWC dataset updates should follow a similar process to the
|
|
TAC notification model with distribution of a narrative SIT 605 message.
|
|
The notification to inform the RCCs and SPOCs of TWC dataset updates should be carried out with
|
|
distribution of a narrative SIT [915] message.
|
|
The Cospas-Sarsat Programme shall make available (e.g., on a server/a website/through an API) all
|
|
the different versions of the dataset at all times, in a specific format (i.e., CSV file) allowing remote
|
|
access and download. The MCC shall be capable of updating their locally hosted dataset upon
|
|
receiving the update notification.
|
|
In order to avoid a process that could lead to unnecessary latency in the implementation of a new
|
|
version of the dataset, the update of the locally hosted dataset should not trigger an update of the
|
|
MCC's software.
|
|
The MCC should be able to access and use any of the approved dataset versions.
|
|
|
|
4-4
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
A dedicated letter to beacon manufacturers at the time of approval of the change shall also be
|
|
transmitted by the Secretariat.
|
|
A TWC message dataset version update would be required by the addition, modification, or
|
|
suppression of a question, answer, or instruction. The initial addition of an alternate language will
|
|
not require a version update, but substantive changes to a translated message will require a version
|
|
update. Proposed changes (which are deemed non-urgent) may be collected until a complete
|
|
revision is made. Any version update shall be validated through a systematic process prior to
|
|
implementation by the Programme and needs to be approved by the Programme as described in
|
|
section 4.6.
|
|
RLM Type 3 Feedback
|
|
One bit is allocated to acknowledge the reception of the first RLM Type-3 TWC Acknowledgement:
|
|
when the distress beacon receives the first RLM Type 3 acknowledgement, this bit changes from
|
|
default value 0 to value 1.
|
|
Once the TWC link is established, this bit is set according to the behavior specified by the TWC-SP
|
|
(e.g., for Galileo it stays at the value 1 until either the beacon battery is depleted or the beacon is
|
|
deactivated whichever comes first).
|
|
Long/Short Answer Formats
|
|
This bit defines the way the Rotating Field (\#4) data has to be structured.
|
|
If the bit is set to 0, this means that short-answer-format questions are to be sent, and the bit
|
|
allocation is the one displayed in Figure 4-1.
|
|
If the bit is set to 1, this means that a long-answer-format question and answer shall be sent, and
|
|
the bit allocation is the one displayed in Figure 4-2.
|
|
Spare Bit
|
|
One spare bit, currently unused, is available for possible future use.
|
|
4.1.2
|
|
Questions, Answers and Instructions
|
|
The main objective of the TWC is to allow the exchange of information between a beacon user
|
|
in distress and the SAR Authorities in order to support a more informed SAR response.
|
|
The TWC Questions/Answers/Instructions are broken in two categories:
|
|
1) Initial Questions, automatically displayed at beacon activation, for which answers will be
|
|
directly transmitted to SAR Authorities by MCCs and to the TWC-SP.
|
|
The aim of the set of initial questions is to report the essential elements of the distress, such as,
|
|
number of persons involved, nature of the distress and type of assistance required. Every
|
|
|
|
4-5
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
question should be relevant in any case of distress without other considerations. This
|
|
information should help the SAR Authorities to:
|
|
- determine the level of distress (assistance / distress / life distress);
|
|
- determine which centre is responsible (e.g., land, maritime, aviation, etc.) for the
|
|
coordination;
|
|
- broadcast safety messages and instructions via other means than Cospas-Sarsat;
|
|
- determine whether a medical team is required;
|
|
- task the first assets.
|
|
2) Follow-on Questions/Answers/Instructions, selected by SAR Authorities and sent by the
|
|
TWC-SPs and for which answers are provided by the beacon user will be sent to the TWC-
|
|
SP and be available on the SAR TWC interface (web-based or equivalent).
|
|
The aim of the set of follow-on Questions/Answers/Instructions is to help the SAR Authorities
|
|
better understand the ongoing event. In order to maximize the benefits of communication
|
|
between the beacon user and the SAR Authorities, they should cover as many situations as
|
|
possible. This information should help the SAR Authorities to:
|
|
- task specialized teams;
|
|
- ensure a good understanding of the situation;
|
|
- maintain link with the beacon user;
|
|
- provide the beacon user with relevant advice to maximize the success of the operation;
|
|
- be aware of any change in the situation.
|
|
Several scenarios are presented in Annex A.
|
|
Multiple-Selectable Answers
|
|
The TWC beacon shall allow the user to select multiple answers for some pre-defined questions.
|
|
Every question allowing the user to choose multiple answers shall be identified as such in the
|
|
dataset.
|
|
For each of these questions that allow multiple-selectable-answers, the long answer format will be
|
|
utilized in the FLAM.
|
|
When the Answer format flag bit is set to 1, the long answer format allows for each possible
|
|
combination of answer(s) (e.g., A1 or A1 + A2 or A2 + A3 + A4) to be identified by a unique bit
|
|
combination. Consequently, by associating each bit with a single answer, a maximum of 15
|
|
answers to choose from is possible and the user can choose any combination of answer options.
|
|
|
|
4-6
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
The following details the encoding of the choice of multiple answers in the first Q/A slot in the
|
|
long answer format.
|
|
The number of possible answers is 15, meaning that the user will be able to choose among the 15
|
|
possibilities, the answers to be sent. Each answer's option is identified with the following
|
|
nomenclature: Ai for the answer i, with i going from 1 to 15.
|
|
Each bit is associated with an answer, which means that if a bit is equal to 1 for a particular position
|
|
it indicates the corresponding Ai, as illustrated in Figure 4-3 below.
|
|
Figure 4-3: Answer Field in the Q/A Slot with up to 15 Possible Answers
|
|
If the answers A1, A3, A5, A7, A11 and A13 are the final choice of the user, this results in the
|
|
answer field being encoded as shown in Figure 4-4.
|
|
Figure 4-4: Example Encoding of the User's Choice of Multiple Answers
|
|
in the Answer Field of the Long Answer Format
|
|
Decision Tree
|
|
Among the initial automatic questions, some have answers that can trigger a new question.
|
|
The beacon shall be able to handle a decision tree, meaning that depending on the answer(s) from
|
|
the beacon user, the beacon shall automatically display the corresponding next question.
|
|
[The beacon user shall be able to go back to the previous question [in a decision tree] (i.e., back
|
|
function) and select an alternate response.] [The transmission of intermediate steps in the decision
|
|
tree shall be delayed for a period of [30 seconds or one minute] to allow the end user to reach the
|
|
final step before any intermediate steps are transmitted.]
|
|
|
|
4-7
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
In the case where the question allows multiple answers that trigger new questions, the different
|
|
paths of these new questions shall be followed one after the other.
|
|
Due to the risk of confusing the beacon user and having incoherent paths of questions, special care
|
|
must be taken when defining the dataset.
|
|
As with multiple-choice answers, questions for which answers can trigger a subsequent question
|
|
shall be identified in the dataset.
|
|
Handling Questions and Answers
|
|
[TWC beacons shall be capable of allowing the user to backtrack on an answer prior to it being
|
|
transmitted in case of an incorrect choice and to choose an alternative answer to a question. This
|
|
capability maybe performed by preferably requiring a confirmation of an answer, where a negative
|
|
response would automatically take the user back to the start of that question, or by other acceptable
|
|
means such as a Back Button (Function). Questions so identified in the Q, A & I dataset shall
|
|
require the beacon user to confirm their selected answer to that question prior to it being
|
|
transmitted. The end user shall not be able to skip over a question, all Initial questions must be
|
|
answered in order, however any Follow-on Questions or Instructions take precedence in the
|
|
question queue over any outstanding Initial questions, which are presented to the end user once
|
|
they address the Follow-on question or instruction.]
|
|
4.1.3
|
|
TWC Database Format Definition
|
|
[The following Figure 4-5 shows the format of the CSV database containing the dataset. It shall
|
|
include:
|
|
- Version ID of the dataset,
|
|
- Question ID,
|
|
- Language,
|
|
- Question Text,
|
|
- Answer Format Flag
|
|
- Multiple-selectable answers Flag
|
|
- Next Question
|
|
- Initial Question flag,
|
|
- The columns corresponding to each answer option,
|
|
- The question ID to which each answer can lead (decision tree questions)]
|
|
[When the Multiple-selectable answers Flag has a value of 1, the Answer Format Flag shall always
|
|
have a value of 1, due to the combination of answers being encoded in a Long Answer format
|
|
RF\#4. Moreover, in this case, the beacon shall always display "Select all the answers that apply."
|
|
in addition of the Question Text.]
|
|
|
|
4-8
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
[For the decision tree among the initial questions, if the subsequent question is independent of the
|
|
beacon user choice of answer(s), the column Next Question shall be filled with the ID of the
|
|
subsequent question, rather than filling all the "Go to" columns with the same question ID
|
|
(exception for the Cancellation Protocol). [During the Initial Question phase, when the beacon
|
|
user skips a question, the next question display will be the one corresponding to the ID in the Next
|
|
Question column of the skipped question. If there is none, it means that the Initial Question phase
|
|
is over.]]
|
|
[Finally, note that the flags can take the value 0 or 1 which shall be interpreted as False and True,
|
|
respectively.]
|
|
Version
|
|
ID
|
|
Question
|
|
ID
|
|
Language
|
|
Question
|
|
Text
|
|
Answer
|
|
format flag
|
|
Multiple-selectable
|
|
answers flag
|
|
Next
|
|
Question
|
|
<5 bits>
|
|
<7 bits>
|
|
<Text>
|
|
<Text>
|
|
<1 bit>
|
|
<1 bit>
|
|
<7 bits>
|
|
Initial
|
|
Question
|
|
flag
|
|
|
|
|
|
<7 bits>
|
|
<Text> <Text> <Text> <Text> <Text> <Text> <Text> <Text> <Text> <Text>
|
|
|
|
|
|
0001 - Go to
|
|
0010 - Go to
|
|
<Text>
|
|
<Text>
|
|
<Text>
|
|
<Text>
|
|
<Text>
|
|
<7 bits>
|
|
<7 bits>
|
|
0011 - Go to
|
|
0100 - Go to
|
|
0101 - Go to
|
|
0110 - Go to
|
|
0111 - Go to
|
|
<7 bits>
|
|
<7 bits>
|
|
<7 bits>
|
|
<7 bits>
|
|
<7 bits>
|
|
1000 - Go to
|
|
1001 - Go to
|
|
1010 - Go to
|
|
1011 - Go to
|
|
1100 - Go to
|
|
1101 - Go to
|
|
<7 bits>
|
|
<7 bits>
|
|
<7 bits>
|
|
<7 bits>
|
|
<7 bits>
|
|
<7 bits>
|
|
1110 - Go to
|
|
1111 - Go to
|
|
<7 bits>
|
|
<7 bits>
|
|
[Figure 4-5: CSV Database Format That Might be Used to Host The Different Versions of
|
|
the Dataset]
|
|
|
|
4-9
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
4.1.4
|
|
Return Link Message for TWC
|
|
The objective of TWC is to provide the SAR Authorities with the information from the beacon
|
|
user as quickly as possible. In order to do so, the TWC-SP shall use RLM Type 3 which is
|
|
designed for Two Way Communication, and it shall:
|
|
-
|
|
Transmit automatic acknowledgement of the detection and localization (without
|
|
confirmed position) of the alert by an MCC;
|
|
-
|
|
Transmit new follow-on questions or instructions and/or acknowledgement to
|
|
answers received by the TWC - Service Provider.
|
|
This RLM Type-3 should not wait for the confirmation of the position but should be sent as soon
|
|
as a location of the beacon is provided to the MCC.
|
|
An RLS Type-3 TWC capable beacon may or may not be RLS Type-1 Acknowledgement
|
|
capable without any impact on the functioning of either.
|
|
Galileo RLM Implementation Details
|
|
The following figure illustrates the bit allocation of the RLM Type-3 in the European GNSS
|
|
(Galileo) Open Service Signal-in-Space Interface Control Document (OS SIS ICD version
|
|
[TBC]).
|
|
The following data fields have been identified as being in a RLM Type-3 TWC:
|
|
SAR RLM Data Values
|
|
Bit Allocation
|
|
15 Hex ID
|
|
60 Bits
|
|
Message Code
|
|
4 Bits
|
|
Acknowledgement
|
|
2 Bits
|
|
Question/Instruction ID
|
|
14 Bits (2 slots for Q/I ID)
|
|
Total
|
|
80 Bits
|
|
Figure 4-6: RLM Type-3 bit allocation
|
|
Each bit field of the RLM Type-3 TWC structure is described in the following subsections:
|
|
15 Hex ID
|
|
The 15 Hex ID is identical to the 60 bits (15 Hexadecimal characters) of the standard beacon
|
|
identification of document C/S T.018.
|
|
|
|
4-10
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
Message Code
|
|
In the RLMs, a field of 4 bits are dedicated to describe the RLS service for which the RLM is used. In
|
|
this case, it is dedicated to TWC. Message code for TWC service is defined as "0011".
|
|
TWC RLM Function
|
|
Two bits informs on the function of the RLM Type-3 TWC:
|
|
- if the bit values are 00, it means that the information carried by the two Q/I ID slots is new
|
|
questions or instructions to the beacon. Either the two slots are each filled with a new question
|
|
or instruction, or only the first slot (Qx/Ix ID) is filled with a new question or instruction and
|
|
the second slot (Qy/Iy ID) is at default value.
|
|
- if the bit values are 01, it means that the information carried by the first Q/I ID slot (Qx/Ix
|
|
ID) is a new question or instruction to the beacon and the information carried by the second
|
|
Q/I ID slot (Qy/Iy ID) is an acknowledgement to an answer provided by the beacon user via
|
|
the question identifier.
|
|
- if the bit values are 10, it means that the information carried by the two Q/I ID slots is
|
|
acknowledgement to the answers provided by the beacon user via the questions identifier.
|
|
Either the two slots are each filled with an acknowledgement to an answer, or only the first slot
|
|
(Qx/Ix ID) is filled with an acknowledgement to an answer and the second slot (Qy/Iy ID) is
|
|
at default value.
|
|
- if the bit values are 11, it means that the TWC-SP system is automatically acknowledging
|
|
that the alert has been detected and at least a location is available (no location confirmation
|
|
required). Hence, the content of the following two Q/I ID slots is at default value and can be
|
|
ignored
|
|
Question/Instruction ID
|
|
Two slots of seven bits are allocated to the identification of two questions and/or instructions.
|
|
4.1.5
|
|
GNSS On-Times
|
|
Currently, the minimum operating times of the GNSS receiver in an RLS capable beacon are that
|
|
it is on for the first 30 minutes after beacon activation, followed by an on period of 15 minutes
|
|
every hour for 6 hours as defined by Moffset.
|
|
For the TWC, the initial on period of the GNSS receiver shall be 180 minutes and after that time
|
|
the GNSS receiver is on for 15 minutes every hour for 9 hours as defined by Moffset.
|
|
|
|
4-11
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
TWC Considerations for SGB Registries
|
|
[TBD]
|
|
4.3
|
|
TWC Beacon User Interface
|
|
After beacon activation, an indicator should appear in order to notify the beacon user that the TWC
|
|
link has been established and that the alert has been located.
|
|
In the initial question-answering phase, the questions are presented sequentially and must be
|
|
answered before the next question is displayed to the user.
|
|
Once the user provides an answer, the question-and-answer pair will be encoded by the beacon in
|
|
the Rotating Field \#4 and transmitted. There is no requirement to notify the user that their answer
|
|
has been received by the TWC-SP or SAR authorities, but this functionality may also be
|
|
implemented.
|
|
See document C/S T.018, sections 4.5.17.1 to 4.5.17.4 for details on the TWC Beacon user interface.
|
|
4.4
|
|
SAR-User Interface
|
|
The SAR TWC Interface should allow the SAR authority users to:
|
|
-
|
|
Display all the communication items (Questions/Answers/Instructions) sorted in
|
|
chronological order;
|
|
-
|
|
Display the links between the questions and the associated answers;
|
|
-
|
|
Display the status of the questions and instructions (selected/sent/received by the
|
|
beacon/answered (for questions only));
|
|
-
|
|
[Hand-over the right to another SAR authority to be the active user in the communication
|
|
with a beacon (only one active user allowed at a time)];
|
|
-
|
|
Display to the new user the whole communication that took place between the beacon and
|
|
previous users;
|
|
-
|
|
Display the whole communication in monitoring mode only if an active user is currently
|
|
communicating with the beacon;
|
|
-
|
|
Obtain a copy of past (archived) TWC communications, as allowed under the TWC-SPs
|
|
policies and user agreements.
|
|
The
|
|
SAR
|
|
TWC
|
|
Interface
|
|
should
|
|
display
|
|
the
|
|
communication
|
|
items
|
|
(Questions/Answers/Instructions) taking into account the version of the library installed into the
|
|
beacon.
|
|
|
|
4-12
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
4.5
|
|
TWC Beacon Type Approval
|
|
The Programme has responsibility for validating any Cospas-Sarsat specified items as documented
|
|
(or to be developed for inclusion) in documents C/S T.018 and C/S T.021, consequently, it has the
|
|
responsibility for type approval of TWC beacons.
|
|
All TWC features and functionality defined in document C/S T.018 shall be validated by one of the
|
|
means of compliance defined in document C/S T.021 section 4.4, and the appropriate method
|
|
of compliance shall be set out in relevant parts of document C/S T.021.
|
|
Other functionalities related to the TWC that are not specified within the C/S T.018 should be tested
|
|
and verified by entities outside Cospas-Sarsat as is currently done for beacons with functions under
|
|
third parties' responsibility (e.g., ETSI, EUROCAE, IEC, RTCA, RTCM, etc.).
|
|
The development of interface requirements is not an essential function thus it shall be outside of the
|
|
scope of the Programme unless specified in document C/S T.018. However, testing shall ensure that
|
|
anything connected to a beacon causes no harm to the beacon or prevents it from fulfilling its primary
|
|
purpose.
|
|
The beacons should be updated with the latest version(s) of TWC message dataset when still in
|
|
production, but the beacon user shall also have the possibility to update it after the beacon has left
|
|
the manufacturer' facility (e.g., via an external third-party interface). The responsibility to update
|
|
the dataset in the beacon and/or external user interface is up to the end user with support from the
|
|
manufacturer as it is outside of the Programme's capability. As part of the type approval process, the
|
|
beacon manufacturer must include beacon user instructions that demonstrate that the beacon can be
|
|
updated and how.
|
|
The TAC approval requirements associated with TWC should include confirmation that:
|
|
a) The TWC beacon user interface is installed and working (directly through an integrated
|
|
screen and interface mechanism or indirectly through an external device or some
|
|
combination with limited functionality on the beacon and additional functionality on the
|
|
external device).
|
|
b) Both initial and follow-on questions and answers work correctly.
|
|
c) The most current dataset(s) of questions, answers and instructions is installed and working
|
|
with the beacon.
|
|
d) Dataset version can be updated.
|
|
e) The beacon properly synchronizes the questions and answers prior to transmission.
|
|
f) Any additional functionality does not cause the beacon performance to drop below the
|
|
approved beacon performance requirements. Typical examples of the performance
|
|
requirements of greatest concern would be "Operational Lifetime" (battery life) and
|
|
"Frequency Stability" (due to other transmitters such as for external devices).
|
|
g) All other integral functions of the beacon, including RLS if integrated in the beacon, operate
|
|
in accordance with Cospas-Sarsat specifications independent of a successful coupling with
|
|
the TWC interface device.
|
|
|
|
4-13
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
4.6
|
|
TWC Message Dataset Validation
|
|
Initial questions and answers, follow on questions and answers, and instructions in all available
|
|
languages will be contained in document C/S [TBD].
|
|
The Programme will be responsible for developing and maintaining the dataset of initial questions,
|
|
and answers. This will be accomplished through the established Programme management process
|
|
as outlined in document C/S P.011, "Cospas-Sarsat Programme Management Policy". Proposed
|
|
changes to initial questions and answers will be reviewed by the Joint Committee and/or an Experts
|
|
Working Group and recommended to Council for approval. Once approved by the Council, the
|
|
Secretariat will forward a request for an updated translation to any National Administrations that
|
|
have provided official translations of the dataset. Once the text in all three official Programme
|
|
languages is available, the Secretariat will document the official dataset version and all translations
|
|
in document C/S [TBD], post these updates to the C-S website, and send notification to all TWC-
|
|
SPs, beacon manufacturers, and the Parties. Additional language translations will be added as they
|
|
are received and notifications provided.
|
|
The Programme will exercise oversight over the validation criteria and process for the TWC
|
|
follow-on questions, answers, and instructions (Q/A/I) dataset validation.
|
|
4.6.1
|
|
TWC message Dataset Validation Principles
|
|
The TWC Dataset Validation Panel will ensure that all TWC follow-on Q/A/I messages adhere to
|
|
the principles outlined below.
|
|
In addition, the Joint Committee and/or an Experts Working Group will consider these principles
|
|
when reviewing proposed changes to the initial questions and answers.
|
|
These principles include that the Q/A/I messages:
|
|
a) be related to safety of life to align with the Programme's mission;
|
|
b) use simple phrasing that eases translation among languages;
|
|
c) allow for efficient exchange of TWC messages between beacon users and first
|
|
responders;
|
|
d) not be discriminatory;
|
|
e) be as short as possible; and
|
|
f) be direct and affirmative messages.
|
|
4.6.2
|
|
TWC message Dataset Validation Process
|
|
The validation of a new release of the follow-on part of the Q/A/I dataset will be performed by a
|
|
TWC Dataset Validation Panel for the approval by the Parties.
|
|
The TWC Dataset Validation Panel shall be composed of experts nominated by the Parties and the
|
|
TWC-SPs and will be supported by the Secretariat.
|
|
|
|
4-14
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
The TWC Dataset Validation Panel should be a permanent body, and appropriate amendments to
|
|
document C/S P.011 should be developed.
|
|
The complete review process of dataset updates is intended to be an expedited process completed
|
|
within [TBD] months.
|
|
The process begins with either Participants (i.e., Parties, user states, ground and space segment
|
|
providers, per document C/S P.011), observers of the Cospas-Sarsat Programme, or SAR Users
|
|
submitting a proposal for an update to the dataset to the appropriate TWC-SP. The TWC-SP will
|
|
consolidate proposed updates as needed, solicit concurrence for the proposed update from their
|
|
community of SAR Users as appropriate, and forward the mature proposal to the Programme, via the
|
|
Secretariat, for validation.
|
|
On receipt of a proposal for an update to the follow-on questions/answers and instructions to a
|
|
dataset from a TWC-SP, the Secretariat will circulate the proposal to members of the TWC Dataset
|
|
Validation Panel for review. Once the panel members have confirmed their concurrence with the
|
|
proposed update, the Secretariat will forward the proposed update to the Party Representatives for
|
|
approval (typically provided within 14 days). On approval of the update, the Secretariat will advise
|
|
the TWC-SP that originally consolidated and submitted the updates, as well as all other TWC-
|
|
SPs, and initiate the processes to update the document C/S [TBD] with dataset in each of the
|
|
official Programme languages, post it to the Cospas-Sarsat website and inform Participants of the
|
|
update.
|
|
Once a new or updated follow-on TWC message dataset has been validated, approved, and
|
|
documented in document C/S [TBD], the Secretariat will forward a request for an updated translation
|
|
to any National Administrations that have provided official translations of the dataset. Once these
|
|
translations are received, the Secretariat will document all translations in document C/S [TBD], post
|
|
these updates to the Cospas-Sarsat website, and inform Participants of the update.
|
|
4.7
|
|
Beacon Design Guidelines
|
|
The beacon design shall adhere to the requirements defined in document C/S T.018 and other
|
|
international standards, as appropriate. Figure 4-7 provides two examples of the spectrum of methods
|
|
of implementing a TWC beacon user interface into Second Generation Beacons (other methods of
|
|
implementation may also be possible).
|
|
|
|
4-15
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
User Interface on
|
|
3rd Party Device
|
|
C/S Beacon
|
|
User
|
|
Indications
|
|
Library ID
|
|
Question &
|
|
Answer Data
|
|
Library ID and
|
|
Q&A Database
|
|
User I/F App
|
|
Refinements
|
|
C/S Beacon
|
|
User
|
|
Indications
|
|
User
|
|
Interaction
|
|
Library ID and
|
|
Q&A Database
|
|
Question &
|
|
Answer Data
|
|
Display System
|
|
User Controls
|
|
Library ID and
|
|
Q&A Database
|
|
TWC Fully Integrated
|
|
Into C/S Beacon
|
|
TWC Minimally
|
|
Integrated Into C/S
|
|
Beacon
|
|
Figure 4-7: Possible Spectrum of TWC Integration of Functionality into Beacons
|
|
- END OF SECTION 4 -
|
|
|
|
5-1
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
5.
|
|
TWC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
|
|
To the extent possible, the Programme intends to align the introduction of an optional TWC
|
|
capability with the introduction into operations of SGBs.
|
|
The plan described in this section refers to the Galileo RLSP plan for the introduction of SGB
|
|
TWC capability. Other RLSPs plans might be added to this document in the future.
|
|
5.1
|
|
Assumptions and Dependencies
|
|
The successful implementation of the Two-Way Communication (TWC) system in the Cospas-
|
|
Sarsat Programme hinges on several critical assumptions and dependencies. These are pivotal in
|
|
guiding the project's direction and ensuring its feasibility and effectiveness.
|
|
- Operational Capabilities of Beacons: It is assumed that the beacon user segment will be
|
|
based on the roll-out of SGB devices and that manufacturers and labs will be capable of
|
|
respectively producing and testing the optional capability thus producing type approved
|
|
beacon models.
|
|
- Coverage: The TWC functionality, as is any other Cospas-Sarsat function, is intended to be
|
|
provided globally (and is further described in Section 6.4). However, as TWC is an optional
|
|
capability, some RCC/SPOCS might choose not to establish interactive communications
|
|
with compatible users in distress.
|
|
- Ground Segment: The TWC will entail changes across key System components (e.g.,
|
|
MEOLUTs and/or MCCs). This plan assumes that such changes will not be major, and will
|
|
be primarily focussed on the MCCs, but represents an important System evolution
|
|
introducing the distribution of RLS Type 3 and therefore should be implemented by the
|
|
ground segment providers in a timely manner (as endorsed by the Council).
|
|
In addition, a new interface and associated infrastructure, will need to be commissioned and
|
|
put into operation by the relevant TWC Service Providers (TWC-SP).
|
|
- Programme Management: As mentioned above, the rollout of the TWC is heavily
|
|
dependent on the collaborative efforts of all the involved stakeholders, including beacon
|
|
manufacturers, the Cospas-Sarsat Secretariat, ground and space segment providers, TWC
|
|
service providers, national Administrations, as well as SAR operational personnel. Their
|
|
coordinated efforts are essential to ensuring that the new functionality of TWC conforms to
|
|
a common architecture, complies with agreed performance standards, and does not harm the
|
|
current System in operations. In view of this, the plan foresees TWC-focused EWG
|
|
meetings, as appropriate, to consolidate any intersessional work performed.
|
|
|
|
5-2
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
5.2
|
|
Implementation Steps
|
|
The deployment of the TWC is a complex matter requiring the cooperation of multiple stakeholders,
|
|
and a step-by-step process is the most suitable path for a successful implementation.
|
|
Therefore, the plan proposed follows a segmented and distinct, well-defined three phases designed for
|
|
a gradual delivery of TWC added value at each stage, while carefully managing the risks and allowing
|
|
the multiple stakeholders to progress on their assigned development areas. The three phases consist of:
|
|
a TWC Pilot Capability, the Initial Operational Capability (IOC) and the Full Operational Capability
|
|
(FOC). These steps delineate the development and validation, the provision of initial TWC data to
|
|
SAR providers, and the full compliance to the concept of operations.
|
|
The necessity, added value (goals), criteria, required changes, and anticipated challenges are further
|
|
described by phase in the sections below.
|
|
5.3
|
|
TWC Pilot Capability
|
|
The TWC Pilot Capability will provide a test environment allowing early access to a subset of the
|
|
TWC-SP capabilities. Such phase should be used as driving mechanism to develop and test the
|
|
necessary TWC system integration activities within the Cospas-Sarsat Programme leading to the
|
|
TWC IOC.
|
|
Objective: This Phase's main objective is the deployment and validation of an early version of the
|
|
TWC Service, which will:
|
|
a) include the development of a test plan for the TWC system which defines success criteria;
|
|
b) evaluate all aspects of the TWC data flows, and confirm the expected performance levels and
|
|
support the development, and successful execution, of a system test of the TWC;
|
|
c) allow SAR authorities to get acclimated to TWC by enabling them to begin preparations for
|
|
operational deployment;
|
|
d) establish a feedback loop, capturing operational and system inputs essential for refining the
|
|
TWC implementation, its operational concept and Service provision;
|
|
e) engage beacon manufacturers, aiding them on the development and the testing of their
|
|
respective TWC-capable beacons as well as assisting on the type approval process;
|
|
f) allow verification of TWC scenarios, analysis of the performance, security and overall
|
|
effectiveness for SAR operations;
|
|
g) refine C/S System documents if required by the validation;
|
|
h) define system testing procedures and success criteria in accordance with the plan developed in
|
|
a) above; and
|
|
i) perform System testing and report; the successful outcome for system testing shall be a
|
|
condition for progressing to the IOC phase.
|
|
|
|
5-3
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
Conditions:
|
|
a) Provision of the required TWC-SP infrastructure including interface to an associated RLSP
|
|
as shown in Figure 2.1.
|
|
b) The implementation of the relevant changes by at least the MCC associated with the TWC-
|
|
SP for the TWC dataflow from MCC to TWC-SP.
|
|
c) The implementation of relevant changes for the TWC dataflow from at least one MCC to
|
|
at least one SAR authority.
|
|
d) The availability of an SGB TWC-enabled prototype beacon but only for the end-to-end
|
|
demonstration and evaluation.
|
|
5.4
|
|
Initial Operational Capability (IOC)
|
|
The IOC phase constitutes the first TWC operational capability implemented by the Programme,
|
|
which shall include the ability to operationally relay the TWC Q&A data to the relevant SAR
|
|
authorities and TWC-SP in a limited geographical area and the use of an agreed dataset of
|
|
questions and answers, based on type-approved beacons. During this phase, provision of the TWC
|
|
service might be limited geographically to those regions where administrations have committed to
|
|
making appropriate changes to their ground segment and perform the required actions in order to
|
|
enable the relevant national SAR authorities to participate in the provision of this service.
|
|
Initial operational capability is the declaration by the Cospas-Sarsat Programme that the System is
|
|
capable to provide reliable SGB data and that alert data (including from a TWC beacon) is being
|
|
distributed operationally between all data distribution regions. IOC is based on a Galileo L-band
|
|
space segment, a partial TWC capable ground segment, and completion of the TWC Pilot
|
|
Capability Phase. The MEOSAR SGB system shall provide global alert coverage for the TWC
|
|
IOC phase. The distribution of TWC messages from the TWC-SP may be limited in geographical
|
|
area.
|
|
Criteria for SGB-TWC IOC:
|
|
a) The MEOSAR SGB System must be at IOC or FOC.
|
|
b) Operational TWC-SP infrastructure (e.g., SAR User Interface, Interface to MCC
|
|
Associated with the TWC-SP, RLSP, TWC RLM supported, etc.).
|
|
c) An approved Q/A/I dataset must be available in at least English.
|
|
d) The ability to type-approve a TWC-SGB.
|
|
e) Completion of the approved System Testing for SGB-TWC.
|
|
f) Regionally available based upon National declaration of TWC processing capability and
|
|
acceptance of SGB-TWC coding in beacons with country ID (MID) (documented in C/S
|
|
S.007).
|
|
|
|
5-4
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
5.5
|
|
Full Operational Capability (FOC)
|
|
[Full operational capability is the declaration by Cospas-Sarsat that the TWC service should
|
|
be considered fully operational. At FOC the TWC service satisfies all requirements defined by
|
|
Cospas-Sarsat and the TWC-SP, including those contained in document C/S A.003. This
|
|
ensures that sufficient space and ground segment components have been commissioned in
|
|
accordance with Cospas-Sarsat requirements. The MEOSAR SGB system shall provide global
|
|
coverage for the FOC phase.]
|
|
[Criteria for SGB-TWC FOC:
|
|
a) All IOC criteria is met
|
|
b) Adopted Q/A/I dataset is available in the 3 Programme languages
|
|
c) Global SGB coverage with sufficient TWC processing by the Ground Segment for
|
|
distribution]
|
|
- END OF SECTION 5 -
|
|
|
|
6-1
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
6.
|
|
TWC HIGH LEVEL REQUIREMENTS
|
|
The objective of this section is to define a minimum standard applicable to all TWC services (all
|
|
TWC-SPs). The performance of the TWC service is ultimately limited by the performance of the
|
|
elements of this service, i.e., MEOSAR forward and GNSS return links and the performance of
|
|
TWC-SP and the TWC SGB.
|
|
6.1
|
|
Integrity
|
|
The
|
|
probability
|
|
of
|
|
processing
|
|
anomalies
|
|
(i.e.,
|
|
an
|
|
error
|
|
in
|
|
the
|
|
displayed
|
|
question/answer/instruction) from a beacon to SAR service shall be less than [10.0^-04] and from
|
|
SAR service to beacon shall be less than [10.0^-04].
|
|
6.2
|
|
Availability
|
|
The TWC service is considered available when all TWC functions are performed with the defined
|
|
integrity and within the defined latency performance.
|
|
The TWC service shall be available [TBD %] of the time (including the Cospas-Sarsat and TWC-
|
|
SP contributions evaluated at [TBD %] each), over any one-year period.
|
|
6.3
|
|
Latency
|
|
The time from selection of answers by the beacon user to the display of these answers on the TWC-
|
|
SP interface for the SAR authorities shall be shorter than [TBD] minutes [TBD] percent of the
|
|
time in the first 60 minutes of beacon activation and [TBD] minutes [TBD] percent of the time,
|
|
thereafter.
|
|
The time from the transmission of questions/instructions by the SAR authorities on the TWC-SP
|
|
interface to the display of these questions/instructions on the beacon display shall be shorter than
|
|
[3] minutes [90] percent of the time assuming the beacon GNSS receiver is active and nominal
|
|
reception with a clear sky view.
|
|
Once the first [180] minutes after activation has past, the time from the transmission of
|
|
questions/instructions by the SAR authorities on the TWC-SP interface to the display of these
|
|
questions/instructions on the beacon display shall be shorter than [50] minutes [90] percent of the
|
|
time assuming the beacon GNSS receiver is active for [15] minutes every hour with nominal
|
|
reception and a clear sky view.
|
|
|
|
6-2
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
6.4
|
|
TWC Coverage
|
|
TWC coverage is a characteristic of a service provided by the Cospas-Sarsat Programme and a
|
|
TWC service provider introduced to ensure that the two way communication between a user with
|
|
a TWC-capable beacon and SAR personnel is provided at established performance levels in a
|
|
defined geographic area of the globe.
|
|
The Cospas-Sarsat Programme intends to provide global 406 MHz forward link alert coverage for
|
|
SGB TWC capable beacons.
|
|
The constellation of satellites used by a TWC service provider for the GNSS return link service
|
|
defines the coverage service region for that TWC SP.
|
|
It is anticipated that TWC coverage at FOC should be global for each Service Provider.
|
|
6.5
|
|
Security
|
|
The SAR TWC Interface service will be limited to registered users. Access will be controlled by
|
|
user ID and authentication credentials.
|
|
6.6
|
|
Archiving
|
|
The TWC service provider should maintain an archive in accordance with local regulatory
|
|
requirements.
|
|
- END OF SECTION 6 -
|
|
|
|
A-1
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
ANNEX A - EXCHANGE MESSAGE SCENARIOS
|
|
[To be updated]
|
|
[The beacon will exchange information with the SAR authorities via FLAMs (Forward Link Alert
|
|
Messages) and TWC Type-3 RLMs (Return Link Messages) that will contain the Questions,
|
|
Answers and Instructions. The Initial Questions are displayed automatically when the beacon is
|
|
triggered. The follow-on questions are selected by the SAR authorities and sent by the TWC-SP
|
|
to the beacon via a GNSS signal.
|
|
Furthermore, beacon and TWC-SP exchange acknowledgements in order to indicate the reception
|
|
of previous messages. Figure A-1 shows a high-level representation of the operating concept.]
|
|
Figure A-1: Summary of the data exchange between SAR authorities and beacon
|
|
[Five distinct user cases are presented and described below:
|
|
- The user activates the beacon and answers to the initial questions (see Figure A-2)
|
|
- The user answers the follow-on questions asked by SAR authorities (see Figure A-3)
|
|
- The user does not immediately answer the follow-on questions (see Figure A-4)
|
|
- The user receives information or an instruction message (see Figure A-5)
|
|
- The user activates the beacon and does not answer any initial question (see Figure A-6)]
|
|
|
|
A-2
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
Figure A-2 - Answers to initial questions
|
|
[To get an idea of the time scales involved in these scenarios, we can make the following
|
|
assumptions. The best-case full loop time, with no delays anywhere, is around 2 minutes. However,
|
|
it is likely that the transmission of an TWC Type-3 RLM and its successful decoding at beacon
|
|
level will not be immediate, thus a full loop for a given question and answer will probably be of
|
|
the order of 4 - 5 minutes, and could be more than this, especially after the first 30 minutes of
|
|
beacon operation.
|
|
In order to indicate the establishment of the TWC link to the user and to transmit information as
|
|
soon as possible, no position confirmation is required for the MCC to send data to the TWC-SP or
|
|
to the SAR Authorities.
|
|
For all the Figure in this Section, the legend that applies is the following:
|
|
1st case (Figure A-1): The user activates the beacon and answers to the initial questions
|
|
The user triggers its beacon and sends a FLAM containing the information on the TWC capability.
|
|
The TWC capability triggers the transmission of a TWC Type-3 RLM Acknowledging the alert,
|
|
without waiting for position confirmations that will be acknowledged by the beacon upon
|
|
reception, on the next transmitted FLAM.]
|
|
|
|
A-3
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
[Meanwhile, the user has the possibility to answer the initial questions. Once the user answers to
|
|
the first question, the appropriate Rotating Field of the FLAM will be updated with the answered
|
|
question(s) and their answer(s).
|
|
Upon reception by the TWC-SP, the SAR Authorities can visualize the answers on the SAR TWC
|
|
interface or equivalent while receiving the information from the MCC\*. The TWC-SP sends to the
|
|
beacon an acknowledgement of reception of the answers (TWC Type-3 RLM ACK to answer) in
|
|
the next RLMs via Galileo SIS.
|
|
The beacon receives the acknowledgement of its initial answers reception by SAR authoritiesand
|
|
if no more questions or instructions are waiting in the queue, the beacon shall transmit a FLAM
|
|
with a beacon feedback to the last TWC Type-3 RLM ACK. The FLAM continues through the
|
|
forward link pipeline and a single alert is transmitted to the TWC-SP.
|
|
Finally, after this new reception of the FLAM with beacon feedback to the last TWC Type-3 RLM
|
|
ACK, the TWC-SP acknowledges the reception by the beacon and stops the RLM transmissions.]
|
|
Figure A-3 - Answers to follow-on questions from SAR Authorities
|
|
|
|
A-4
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
[2nd case (Figure A-3): The user answers to follow-on questions from SAR Authorities
|
|
Following the first case, the SAR Authorities can now select a set of follow-on questions on the
|
|
SAR TWC interface and generate TWC Type-3 RLM transmission requests via the TWC-SP. The
|
|
TWC Type-3 RLMs will contain the binary ID of each question.
|
|
The beacon receives the questions and the user can answer them by choosing among predefined
|
|
answers. The questions and answers binary IDs are encoded in the RF of the FLAM. Upon
|
|
reception by the TWC-SP, the SAR Authorities can visualize the answers on the SAR TWC
|
|
interface.
|
|
On the TWC-SP side, a reception acknowledgement to the answered questions is sent. At the same
|
|
time, by the TWC-SP. After that, the TWC-SP stops the repetition of the questions in the TWC
|
|
Type-3 RLM.
|
|
The beacon receives the acknowledgement from the TWC-SP and sends a beacon feedback to
|
|
the TWC Type-3 RLM ACK in a FLAM.
|
|
Finally, after its journey in the forward link pipeline, the FLAM is received by the TWC-SP that
|
|
stops the new transmission of TWC Type-3 RLMs upon new reception of a beacon feedback.]
|
|
Figure A-4 - Delayed answers from the user
|
|
|
|
A-5
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
[3rd case (Figure A-4): The user does not immediately answer the questions
|
|
Similarly, to the second case, the SAR Authorities select a set of questions that are encoded in
|
|
TWC Type-3 RLMs. The TWC Type-3 RLMs are sent to the beacon via Galileo SIS.
|
|
If the questions are received and shown at the beacon level but that for any reason the user cannot
|
|
answer them for the time being the beacon sends the FLAM acknowledging the reception of the
|
|
questions (beacon feedback to the TWC Type-3 RLM for questions). Upon reception by the TWC-
|
|
SP, the SAR authorities are notified that the user has received the questions but did not answer
|
|
them yet. The TWC-SP stops RLM repetitions.
|
|
When the user eventually answers the questions, the beacon updates the FLAM in order to now
|
|
include the answers.
|
|
Upon reception by the TWC-SP, after the forward link pipeline, the SAR authorities can visualize
|
|
the answers on the SAR TWC interface and the TWC-SP to the answers (TWC Type-3 RLM ACK
|
|
to answers) sends RLMs containing the reception acknowledgment (TWC RLM ACK).
|
|
The beacon receives the acknowledgement to the answers (TWC Type-3 RLM ACK to answers)
|
|
by the TWC-SP and sends its own acknowledgement, beacon feedback to the TWC Type-3 RLM
|
|
ACK, in the FLAM.
|
|
Again, after the forward link pipeline, the TWC-SP receives the acknowledgement and stops the
|
|
TWC Type-3 RLM transmissions.]
|
|
|
|
A-6
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
Figure A-5 - Instructions/information message
|
|
[4th case (Figure A-5): The user receives information or an instruction message
|
|
In this simpler case, the SAR Authorities want to send instructions or information to the beacon's
|
|
user. A TWC Type-3 RLM transmission by the TWC-SP is requested with the
|
|
instruction/information message encoded.
|
|
The beacon receives the TWC Type-3 RLM with an instruction and sends a FLAM with a beacon
|
|
feedback to the TWC-Type-3 RLM for the instruction.
|
|
Upon reception by the TWC-SP, SAR Authorities can visualize the reception acknowledgement
|
|
(beacon feedback) transferred by the TWC-SP on the SAR TWC interface and the TWC-SP stops
|
|
the TWC Type-3 RLM transmissions.]
|
|
|
|
A-7
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
Figure A-6 - User not answering initial questions
|
|
[5th case (Figure A-6): The user does not answer initial questions
|
|
In this scenario, the user triggers its beacon but does not answer the initial questions. The beacon
|
|
is acting like a non-TWC capable beacon and the SAR authorities still receive the necessary
|
|
information for the rescue.
|
|
The FLAM still requests an Type-3 RLM ACK to alert from the TWC-SP. The TWC-SP sends
|
|
the TWC Type-3 RLM to the beacon in order to acknowledge the alert, without position
|
|
confirmation. The beacon sends a beacon feedback to the TWC Type-3 RLM ACK to alert the
|
|
TWC-SP through the forward link pipeline. The TWC-SP stops the transmission of TWC Type-3
|
|
RLM ACK to alert.]
|
|
- END OF ANNEX A-
|
|
|
|
B-1
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
ANNEX B - EXAMPLE OF THE TWC DATABASE
|
|
[The figure XX below illustrates an example of the database with a portion of the current dataset.
|
|
The beacon user is first prompted with the question 0000001 "Number of people in distress?" and
|
|
can choose one of the following answers:
|
|
|
|
|
|
5-8
|
|
-
|
|
9-16
|
|
-
|
|
17 or more
|
|
-
|
|
Cancel Alert
|
|
If the beacon user chooses one of the first 7 answers [or skips the question], the question
|
|
corresponding to the ID in the column "Next Question" shall be displayed, which is the question
|
|
0000010 "Medicals: Do you need medical Assistance".
|
|
If the beacon user selects "Cancel alert" then the SGB Cancellation protocol shall be executed by
|
|
the beacon, without sending RF\#4 with the question ID 0000001 and the answer ID 1000
|
|
(corresponding to "Cancel Alert").
|
|
Another example; if the beacon user is being prompted with the question 0000011 "Nature of
|
|
distress: What is the nature of distress?" and the user chooses the answer 0001 "Water", the column
|
|
"0001 - Go to" indicates the subsequent question that shall be immediately displayed to the user,
|
|
which in this case is 0000100 "Water/Maritime: What is the distress situation?". [If the beacon
|
|
user skips this question, no other Initial Question shall be displayed as the column "Next Question"
|
|
is empty, Follow-on Question could be displayed if present in the stack.]
|
|
Continuing with the question 0000100, the user can choose any combination of answer(s) among
|
|
the following proposition, as indicated by the "Multiple-selectable answers" flag:
|
|
-
|
|
Man overboard
|
|
-
|
|
Fire/Explosion
|
|
-
|
|
Sinking/Flooding
|
|
-
|
|
Piracy/Security threat
|
|
-
|
|
Craft disabled
|
|
-
|
|
Trapped
|
|
-
|
|
I am lost
|
|
|
|
B-2
|
|
C/S R.025 - Preliminary Issue A
|
|
|
|
The combination of answers will be encoded in the Long format RF\#4 as indicated by the "Answer
|
|
format" flag.
|
|
Note that if the user chooses several of the 4 answers leading to question 001000 "Number of life
|
|
rafts in use?", this subsequent question will be displayed only once.
|
|
[Figure TBS]
|
|
Figure B-7 - Example of the CSV Database Format with a Portion of the Current
|
|
Database]
|
|
|
|
Cospas-Sarsat Secretariat
|
|
1250 Rene-Levesque Blvd. West, Suite 4215, Montreal (Quebec) H3B 4W8 Canada
|
|
Telephone: +1 514 500 7999
|
|
Fax: +1 514 500 7996
|
|
Email: mail@cospas-sarsat.int
|
|
Website: http://www.cospas-sarsat.int |