MCP/gr-mcp-docs
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
gr-mcp-docs/reference/cospas-sarsat/r-series/r014.md
Ryan Malloy 4ed92efd69 refactor: move spec references out of published site 
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.
2026-02-13 05:03:09 -07:00

2471 lines
69 KiB
Markdown
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters

This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.

---
title: "R014: C/S R.014"
description: "Official Cospas-Sarsat R-series document R014"
sidebar:
badge:
text: "R"
variant: "note"
# Extended Cospas-Sarsat metadata
documentId: "R014"
series: "R"
seriesName: "Reports"
documentType: "report"
isLatest: true
documentDate: "October 2009"
originalTitle: "C/S R.014"
---
> **📋 Document Information**
>
> **Series:** R-Series (Reports)
> **Date:** October 2009
> **Source:** [Cospas-Sarsat Official Documents](https://www.cospas-sarsat.int/en/documents-pro/system-documents)
---
COSPAS-SARSAT
INSAT GEOSAR PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION PLAN
C/S R.014
Issue 1
INSAT PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PLAN
History
Issue
Revision
Date
Comments
Approved by CSC-43
LIST OF PAGES
Page \#
Date of
Page \#
Date of
latest
latest
revision
revision
cover
Oct 09
A-1
Oct 09
Oct 09
A-2
Oct 09
Oct 09
A-3
Oct 09
Oct 09
A-4
Oct 09
Oct 09
A-5
Oct 09
A-6
Oct 09
1-1
Oct 09
A-7
Oct 09
1-2
Oct 09
A-8
Oct 09
A-9
Oct 09
2-1
Oct 09
A-10
Oct 09
2-2
Oct 09
A-11
A-12
Oct 09
Oct 09
3-1
Oct 09
3-2
Oct 09
B-1
Oct 09
3-3
Oct 09
B-2
Oct 09
3-4
Oct 09
3-5
Oct 09
C-1
Oct 09
3-6
Oct 09
C-2
Oct 09
3-7
Oct 09
3-8
Oct 09
D-1
Oct 09
3-9
Oct 09
D-2
Oct 09
3-10
Oct 09
3-11
Oct 09
E-1
Oct 09
3-12
Oct 09
E-2
Oct 09
3-13
Oct 09
3-14
Oct 09
F-1
Oct 09
3-15
Oct 09
F-2
Oct 09
3-16
Oct 09
3-17
Oct 09
G-1
Oct 09
3-18
Oct 09
G-2
Oct 09
4-1
Oct 09
H-1
Oct 09
4-2
Oct 09
H-2
Oct 09
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.
INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1-1
1.1
Purpose of Document .................................................................................................. 1-1
1.2
Background ................................................................................................................. 1-1
1.3
Responsibilities ........................................................................................................... 1-2
1.4
Schedule ...................................................................................................................... 1-2
2.
INSAT GEOSAR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ................................................................................... 2-1
2.1
Performance Evaluation Goals .................................................................................... 2-1
2.2
Objectives .................................................................................................................... 2-1
2.3
Priorities ...................................................................................................................... 2-2
3.
INSAT PERFORMANCE EVALUATION METHODOLOGY .......................... 3-1
3.1
General Evaluation Methodology ............................................................................... 3-1
3.2
Detailed Description of Objectives ............................................................................. 3-1
3.2.1
T-1: Processing Threshold, System Margin and Beacon Message
Processing Performance ..................................................................... 3-2
3.2.2
T-2: Time to Produce Valid, Complete and Confirmed Messages ............. 3-7
3.2.3
T-3: Carrier Frequency Measurement Accuracy ...................................... 3-10
3.2.4
T-4: INSAT GEOLUT Channel Capacity ................................................ 3-11
3.2.5
T-5: Impact of Interference ....................................................................... 3-13
3.2.6
T-6: Processing Anomalies ....................................................................... 3-15
3.2.7
T-7: INSAT Coverage ............................................................................... 3-17
3.2.8
C-1: Commissionning of INSAT GEOLUT ............................................. 3-18
4.
REPORTING GUIDELINES .................................................................................. 4-1
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3-1: Graphs Depicting Processing Threshold, System Margin, Valid Message
and Complete Long Message Processing Performance ..................................... 3-6
Figure 3-2: Graphs Depicting Average, 95th Percentile and 98th Percentile of Valid
Completed and Confirmed Messages ................................................................ 3-9
Figure 3-3: Graphs Depicting Frequency Measurement Accuracy Performance............... 3-11
Figure 3-4: Graph Depicting INSAT GEOSAR Capacity ................................................. 3-12
Figure 3-5: Test Set-up for Interference Evaluation ........................................................... 3-13
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3-1:
Sample Tables for Objective T-1 Results .......................................................... 3-5
Table 3-2:
Sample Tables for Objective T-2 Results ......................................................... 3-8
Table 3-3:
Sample Tables for Objective T-3 Results ........................................................ 3-10
Table 3-4:
Sample Table for Capacity Statistics ............................................................... 3-12
Table 3-5:
Sample Table of Coverage Statistics ............................................................... 3-18
LIST OF ANNEXES
Annex A - Format of INSAT Performance Evaluation Reports by GEOLUT Operators
Annex B - Test Scripts for Objectives T-1, T-2 and T-3
Annex C - Test Scripts for Objective T-4 (Channel Capacity)
Annex D - Data to be Collected for Objectives T-1, T-2 and T-3
Annex E - Data to be Collected for Objective T-4
Annex F - Data to be Collected for Objective T-6
Annex G– Data to be Collected for Objective T-7
Annex H - INSAT GEOSAR Performance Evaluation Programme Schedule
1 - 1
1.
INTRODUCTION
The Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) has installed 406 MHz Search and Rescue
(SAR) repeaters on their INSAT-3 communication and meteorological satellites. In order to
enhance the coverage of the Cospas-Sarsat GEOSAR system, the INSAT-3A instrument has
been made available for use after the completion of initial satellite on-orbit tests. However,
the performance of its SAR instrument has yet to be fully evaluated. The Cospas-Sarsat
Council has directed that an INSAT GEOSAR performance evaluation programme be
conducted to:
a.
establish INSAT GEOSAR / GEOLUT performance;
b.
validate specification and commissioning requirements for GEOLUTs which operate
with the INSAT-3A GEOSAR payload; and
c.
verify the performance and, if appropriate, commission the current INSAT GEOLUT
(Bangalore) into the Cospas-Sarsat System.
1.1
Purpose of Document
The purpose of this document is to provide:
a.
test procedures for assessing the performance of the INSAT GEOLUT which operate
with the INSAT SAR instrument;
b.
guidelines for analysing the test results; and
c.
guidelines, procedures and schedule for managing the INSAT GEOSAR performance
evaluation programme and reporting the results.
1.2
Background
From 1996 to 1998 Cospas-Sarsat conducted a demonstration and evaluation programme to
determine the suitability of using satellites in geostationary orbit equipped with SAR
instruments to process the signals from Cospas-Sarsat 406 MHz distress beacons. This
programme, hereafter referred to as the GEOSAR D & E, was implemented using the GOES
series of satellites provided by the USA, the Insat-2 satellites provided by India, and
experimental ground segment equipment provided by Canada, Chile, India, Spain and the
United Kingdom. The GEOSAR D & E demonstrated that GEOSAR satellites provided a
significant enhancement to the Cospas-Sarsat system. Following from this conclusion, in
October 1998 the Cospas-Sarsat Council decided that the 406 MHz GEOSAR system
components should be incorporated into the Cospas-Sarsat System as soon as possible.
1 - 2
While the GEOSAR D & E was being conducted, new 406 MHz GEOSAR repeaters were
developed by EUMETSAT and installed on the MSG meteorological satellite series. Since
the technical characteristics of the MSG SAR instrument were different from SAR
instruments on the GOES satellites, additional tests were performed to establish MSG
GEOSAR / GEOLUT performance, and any special GEOLUT specification and
commissioning requirements. The results of these tests were approved by Cospas-Sarsat in
October 2004.
Following the deployment of a third type of 406 MHz GEOSAR payload onboard INSAT-3A
by the the Republic of India and the signature of an Understanding between the Cospas-
Sarsat Programme and the Republic of India on the provision of Cospas-Sarsat GEOSAR
services in February 2007, the Cospas-Sarsat Council also decided that the INSAT
performance evaluation programme should be based on the technical (T) series of tests
defined in the GEOSAR D & E Plan, as amended to address anticipated INSAT performance.
The INSAT GEOLUT (Bangalore) will participate in the INSAT GEOSAR performance
evaluation programme. Since the Bangalore terminal is the only Cospas-Sarsat GEOLUT
capable of tracking the INSAT-3A payload, the commissioning of the GEOLUT is to be
performed as part of the INSAT GEOSAR performance evaluation.
The administrations of France and Turkey have announced that they will participate in the
INSAT GEOSAR performance evaluation and provide beacon simulator signals for some of
the proposed tests.
1.3
Responsibilities
ISRO is the agency responsible for the implementation and operation of the INSAT
GEOSAR system. Therefore, ISRO will be responsible for assessing the performance of the
INSAT SAR payload and Bangalore GEOLUT during the INSAT performance evaluation
programme. Furthermore, ISRO will ensure that appropriate beacon test signals are
transmitted for the testing and that the tests are conducted as described herein. ISRO will
produce a report in the format specified at Annex A for the consideration of the Cospas-
Sarsat Joint Committee.
1.4
Schedule
The chart at Annex H provides the major milestones of the INSAT GEOSAR Performance
Evaluation Programme.
- END OF SECTION 1 -
2 - 1
2.
INSAT
GEOSAR
PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION
GOALS
AND
OBJECTIVES
2.1
Performance Evaluation Goals
The goals of the performance evaluation programme are to:
a.
characterize the technical performance of the INSAT GEOSAR / GEOLUT system
and confirm that the INSAT GEOSAR satellite, and GEOLUT systems effectively
provide useful 406 MHz alert data; and
b.
validate specification, commissioning requirements and performance for the
GEOLUT which operate with INSAT-3 satellites.
As Part of this evaluation programme, the INSAT GEOLUT will have to be tested in
accordance with the commissioning requirements detailed in document C/S T.010 and, if
appropriate, will be commissioned into the Cospas-Sarsat System.
2.2
Objectives
The programme has been subdivided into specific objectives. Each objective is addressed by
conducting specific tests and analysing the results. Some of the tests will be performed with
a beacon simulator whose power output and message content can be controlled and varied.
The tests will be conducted over several weeks to collect enough data to provide statistically
valid results.
An overview of each objective is listed below, the detailed descriptions of these objectives
are provided in section 3.2.
T-1
Processing Threshold, System Margin, and Beacon Message Processing Performance
Determine the processing threshold, processing performance, system margin and the
performance in respect of long format beacon messages for GEOLUTs which operate
with the INSAT payload. The test signals used to assess these parameters do not
include beacon messages that collide with each other.
T-2
Time to Produce Valid and Confirmed Messages
Determine the statistical distribution of the time required for the GEOLUT to produce
valid and confirmed beacon messages. The test signals used to assess this parameter
do not include beacon messages which collide with each other.
2 - 2
T-3
Carrier Frequency Measurement Accuracy
Determine how accurately the beacon carrier frequency can be determined by the
INSAT GEOSAR / GEOLUT system. The test signals used to assess this parameter
do not include beacon messages which collide with each other.
T-4
INSAT GEOLUT Channel Capacity
Assess the capability of the GEOSAR system to handle multiple simultaneously
active distress beacons in a single 406 MHz channel. This parameter is assessed by
generating traffic loads which include beacon messages which collide with each other.
T-5
Impact of Interference
Monitor the band for the presence of interference while the tests are being performed,
in order to understand any anomalies in the results and to illustrate the ability of the
GEOSAR system to provide valid messages in the presence of interference and noise
in the frequency bands used by the INSAT GEOSAR system.
T-6
Processing Anomalies
Assess the performance of the GEOLUT in respect of the production of processing
anomalies.
T-7
INSAT Coverage
Estimate the geographic coverage of the INSAT GEOSAR system\*.
C-1
Commissionning of the INSAT GEOLUT (Bangalore)
Verify the compliance of the INSAT GEOLUT to the Cospas-Sarsat performance and
design guidelines (specified in C/S T.009) by performing the tests specified in the
GEOLUT Commissionning Standard (C/S T.010) and reporting results in the
appropriate format to the Cospas-Sarsat Joint Comittee for evaluation.
2.3
Priorities
It is anticipated that initial effort would focus on completing the most important tests which
consist of T-1 (processing threshold), T-2 (time to produce a valid message) and C-1
(commissioning of the INSAT GEOLUT), with the understanding that the other tests would
be performed as time permit.
- END OF SECTION 2 -
* Results from previous tests could be used to characterize the INSAT coverage.
3 - 1
3.
INSAT PERFORMANCE EVALUATION METHODOLOGY
3.1
General Evaluation Methodology
The INSAT GEOSAR performance evaluation programme is to be conducted and evaluated
in accordance with the common set of guidelines and procedures as defined below.
a.
ISRO is responsible for scheduling and coordinating all the tests that require the
support of a beacon simulator or test beacons.
b.
Prior to conducting any tests, the Bangalore GEOLUT operator should verify that
there are no reported problems with the satellite which could affect test results.
c.
ISRO should produce an INSAT GEOSAR Performance Evaluation Report in the
format described at Annex A.
________________________________________________________________________
Every effort should be made to ensure that the use of real or simulated beacon signals in
support of the INSAT Performance Evaluation Plan will not generate distress alert messages,
which might be interpreted in the existing LEOSAR and GEOSAR Systems as real alerts.
_________________________________________________________________________
3.2
Detailed Description of Objectives
This section provides the following for each objective of the INSAT GEOSAR Performance
Evaluation Programme:
a.
test procedures,
b.
data collection requirements, and
c.
data reduction/analysis requirements.
To simplify the testing and to reduce the number of 406 MHz test transmissions, test
procedures have been developed which share test transmissions. For example, the output
produced by the GEOLUT resulting from the test transmissions for test T-1 is also used for
evaluating the performance of the GEOLUT in respect of the time to produce valid and
confirmed messages (T-2), and frequency measurement accuracy performance (T-3).
To ensure that the alert messages generated by the GEOLUT can be correlated to the test
signal transmissions, the INSAT Bangalore GEOLUT operator should confirm that the time
of day setting in the GEOLUT is correct before conducting each test.
3 - 2
3.2.1 T-1: Processing Threshold, System Margin, and Beacon Message Processing
Performance
The processing threshold, processing performance and the system margin are "figures of
merit" of the GEOLUT.
Processing Threshold
The processing threshold is the value of the minimum carrier to noise density ratio (C/No) in
dBHz at the GEOLUT processor for which the GEOLUT is able to produce a valid message
for each beacon event 99% of the time (the lower this value the more sensitive the
GEOLUT).
System Margin
The system margin is the difference between a nominal beacon, with an EIRP of 37 dBm, and
a beacon operating at the GEOLUT threshold.
Valid Message Processing Performance
The processing performance requirement documented in C/S T.009 is that GEOLUTs should
be capable of producing valid messages within 5 minutes of beacon activation 95% of the
time, for all beacon signals whose C/No as measured at the GEOLUT is greater than
26 dB-Hz. This test will determine the C/No for which the INSAT GEOLUT can produce a
valid message for each beacon event within 5 minutes of beacon activation 95% of the time.
Long Message Processing Performance
Document C/S T.009 specifies the processing of long messages and the requirement for
comfirmed complete messages. However, at present Cospas-Sarsat has no GEOLUT
performance requirement in respect of producing complete and confirmed long messages.
Nevertheless, with the increased use of location protocol beacons using the long message
format, it is necessary to assess the INSAT system performance in this regard.
3.2.1.1
Methodology and Data Collection
This test assesses the INSAT GEOLUT performance in respect of its ability to produce single
valid, complete and confirmed complete distress beacon messages as a function of the beacon
power transmitted in the direction of the INSAT satellite (beacon EIRP).
A beacon simulator is used to replicate distress beacons that transmit long format messages at
specific EIRPs, for a duration necessary to transmit 20 bursts for each beacon ID. Hereafter
the term “beacon event” is used to describe a beacon being active for a period of time. The
test is conducted by transmitting 50 beacon events for each EIRP, whilst ensuring that signals
from individual beacon events do not overlap in time and frequency with the signals from
other beacon events. The output of the GEOLUT is monitored and the information identified
in Table E-1 is recorded. The procedure is repeated at EIRP values ranging from 37 dBm to
28 dBm, in one dB increments.
3 - 3
Performance of this test requires the following steps.
a.
Use a beacon simulator or a set of controlled test beacons with a variable output
EIRP.
b.
Program the simulator to provide different long format beacon identification codes for
each beacon event. The test scripts used for this test are provided at Annex B,
Table B-1.
c.
Calibrate the beacon simulator output EIRP and carrier frequency (to an accuracy of
0.2 Hz) to confirm the technical characteristics of the transmitted signals.
d.
To avoid interference to the 406 MHz channels currently active for operational use,
ensure that the simulator does not transmit in the channels used for operational
beacons.
e.
Set the simulator EIRP to 37 dBm in the direction of the INSAT-3A satellite.
f.
Transmit the 50 beacon events provided at Table B-1 (an event consists of the same
beacon message transmitted 20 times), ensuring that individual beacon transmissions
do not interfere with each other. To avoid using the capacity of LEOSAR satellite
uplinks, this test shall be scheduled to ensure that test signals are not transmitted when
INSAT GEOLUTs are in the footprint of a Cospas-Sarsat LEOSAR satellites.
g.
Collect the data produced by the GEOLUT for each beacon event as described at
Annex D (note that this data will be analysed to provide the results for this test
objective, as well as for objectives T-2 and T-3).
h.
Repeat the process at the EIRP values listed at Table 3-1, using the associated test
scripts described at Table B-1.
3.2.1.2
Data Reduction, Analysis and Results
For each set of 50 beacon events transmitted at a given EIRP as recorded at Annex D
Table D-1:
a.
Calculate the probability of:
(i) producing at least one valid message for each beacon event as follows:
d EIRP
he selecte
itted at t
nts transm
beacon eve
number of
essage
ne valid m
at least o
produced
ich GEOLUT
nts for wh
beacon eve
number of
3 - 4
(ii)
producing at least one valid message within 5 minutes of beacon activation as
follows:
d EIRP
he selecte
itted at t
nts transm
beacon eve
number of
tion
of activa
in
ssage with
a valid me
produced
ich GEOLUT
nts for wh
beacon eve
number of
min
(iii) producing at least one complete beacon message as follows:
d EIRP
he selecte
itted at t
nts transm
beacon eve
number of
e
ong messag
complete l
a correct
produced
ich GEOLUT
nts for wh
beacon eve
number of
(iv) producing a confirmed complete beacon message as follows:
d EIRP
he selecte
itted at t
nts transm
beacon eve
number of
sage
e long mes
a complet
to confirm
was able
ich GEOLUT
nts for wh
beacon eve
number of
b.
Calculate the C/No at the GEOLUT processor corresponding to each EIRP. Note that
this is a calculated theoretical value of C/No, not the value measured by the
GEOLUT.
c.
Record the results of the calculations above in sample Table 3-1.
d.
Using the data from Table 3-1, produce graphs of the results as depicted at Figure 3-1.
All cases where the GEOLUT was not able to produce a valid message for a beacon event
should be analysed to determine if extraordinary external factors (e.g. interference) could
have caused the GEOLUT not to detect the beacon. If extraordinary external factors caused
the GEOLUT to miss a beacon event, the event should be removed from the statistics and an
explanation provided in the report.
3 - 5
EIRP
from
simulator
(dBm)
Calculated
C/No at
GEOLUT
(dBHz)
Number of
Beacon Events
Used (Valid Msg
Sample Set)
Number of Beacon Events for which
Probability
of Valid
Message
Probability of
Valid Message
within 5 Min
Valid Message
was Produced
Valid Message
was Produced
within 5 Min
28.0
29.0
30.0
31.0
32.0
33.0
34.0
35.0
36.0
37.0
1.00
1.00
EIRP
from
simulator
(dBm)
Number of
Beacon Events
Used
(Complete Msg
Sample Set)
Number of Beacon
Events Used
(Confirmed
Complete Msg
Sample Set)
Number of Beacon
Events for which a
Complete Message
was Produced
Number of Beacon
Events for which a
Confirmed Complete
Message was Produced
Probability of
Complete /
Confirmed
Complete Msg
28.0
29.0
30.0
31.0
32.0
33.0
34.0
35.0
36.0
37.0
1.00
1.00 / 1.00
Table 3-1: Sample Tables for Objective T-1 Results
3 - 6
Figure 3-1:
Graphs Depicting Processing Threshold, System Margin, Valid Message
and Complete Long Message Processing Performance
Processing Threshold and System Margin
C/No
EIRP
37 dBm
Processing Threshold
System
Margin
1.0
.99
.98
.97
.96
.95
Probability of Valid Message
Valid Message Processing Performance
C/No
EIRP
Processing Performance
1.0
.99
.98
.97
.96
.95
Probability of Valid Message Within 5 min
Long Message Processing Performance
C/No
EIRP
Confirmed Complete
Single Complete
1.0
.99
.98
.97
.96
.95
Probability of Successful Message Processing
3 - 7
3.2.2 T-2: Time to Produce Valid, Complete and Confirmed Messages
This test assesses how long it takes the INSAT GEOLUT operating with the INSAT-3A
satellite to produce valid beacon messages, complete long messages, and confirmed complete
long messages. This information will be used to validate message processing requirements
for GEOLUTs which operate with the INSAT satellite, and to determine a figure of merit for
the number of bursts required to successfully process a message.
3.2.2.1
Methodology and Data Collection
For simplicity this test is conducted by analysing the data collected for test T-1 (Threshold).
Note that the T-1 test scenario is specifically designed not to generate beacon bursts which
overlap in time and frequency. Consequently, for operational beacon events, the times to
produce valid, complete, and the time to confirm complete messages may differ from those
determined during this test.
The following test methodology and data collection requirements apply:
a.
Note the EIRP and 15 Hex ID for each beacon event.
b.
For each beacon event note the date/time that the GEOLUT produced:
(i)
the first valid message;
(ii)
the first complete message; and
(iii) the first confirmation of the complete message with an independent integration
process.
c.
Record the data collected above in tabular format as described at Annex D. The table
should have an entry for each beacon event at each EIRP.
3.2.2.2
Data Reduction, Analysis and Results
a.
For each EIRP calculate the average time to:
(i) produce valid messages (ATVM), as follows:
produced
id message
st one val
ich at lea
nts for wh
beacon eve
number of
sage
valid mes
to produce
or GEOLUT
on event f
st in beac
first bur
time after
ATVM 
=
(ii) produce complete messages (ATCM), as follows:
ed
age produc
plete mess
st one com
ich at lea
nts for wh
beacon eve
number of
message
complete
to produce
or GEOLUT
on event f
st in beac
first bur
time after
ATCM 
=
3 - 8
(iii)confirm a complete messages (ATCCM), as follows:
nfirmed
age was co
plete mess
st one com
ich at lea
nts for wh
beacon eve
number of
message
complete
to confirm
or GEOLUT
on event f
st in beac
first bur
time after
ATCCM 
=
b.
In addition, for each EIRP calculate the standard deviation for the time to produce
valid, complete and confirmed complete messages.
c.
For each EIRP determine the time (duration) required for the GEOLUT to provide
95% and 98% of valid, complete, and confirmed complete messages. These values
are determined by normalising the time values by removing the time bias resulting
from the requirement to stagger the start times of each beacon event. The normalised
values are analysed to identify how long the GEOLUT required to produce the 95th
and 98th percentile for valid, complete, and confirmed messages. If the 95th or 98th
percentile was not achieved for any given category, this should be designated as Not
Available (N/A) in the appropriate cell of the table.
d.
Record the results of the above in sample Table 3-2.
e.
Using the data from Table 3-2, produce graphs of the results as depicted in Figure 3-2.
EIRP
(dBm)
C/No
(dBHz)
ATVM
(Sec)
Standard
Deviation of
ATVM
ATCM
(Sec)
Standard
Deviation of
ATCM
ATCCM
(Sec)
Standard
Deviation of
ATCCM
28.0
29.0
.
.
.
37.0
EIRP
(dBm)
C/No
(dBHz)
95th Percentile
98th Percentile
Valid Msg
(Sec)
Complete
Msg (Sec)
Confirmed
Msg (Sec)
Valid Msg
(Sec)
Complete
Msg (Sec)
Confirmed
Msg (Sec)
28.0
29.0
.
.
.
37.0
Table 3-2: Sample Tables for Objective T-2 Results
3 - 9
Figure 3-2:
Graphs Depicting Average, 95th Percentile and 98% Percentile of Valid,
Complete and Confirmed Messages
Average Time to Produce Valid, Complete and Confirmed Complete Messages
C/No
EIRP
Confirmed Complete
(ATCCM)
Complete (ATCM)
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Seconds After First Burst of Beacon Event
Valid (ATVM)
95th Percentile to Produce Valid, Complete and Confirmed Complete Messages
C/No
EIRP
Confirmed Complete
Complete
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Seconds After First Burst of Beacon Event
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Valid
98th Percentile to Produce Valid, Complete and Confirmed Complete Messages
C/No
EIRP
Confirmed Complete
Complete
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Seconds After First Burst of Beacon Event
Valid
3 - 10
3.2.3 T-3: Carrier Frequency Measurement Accuracy
The purpose of this objective is to assess how accurately the beacon carrier frequency can be
measured by the INSAT GEOSAR / GEOLUT system. This is accomplished by comparing
the beacon's carrier frequency for each valid message as measured by the GEOLUT with the
known frequency value for the same beacon, provided by the beacon simulator operator. The
current GEOLUT specification (C/S T.009) requires a frequency measurement accuracy of
2 Hz.
3.2.3.1
Methodology and Data Collection
For simplicity, this test is conducted by analysing the data collected for test T-1. For each
beacon event note the frequency measurement provided by the GEOLUT associated with the
first valid message produced, and record this information as described at Annex D.
The measured frequency should be corrected by the GEOLUT, as possible, to account for any
calibration that would normally be performed during real GEOLUT operations (e.g. if the
GEOLUT includes features for assessing and correcting frequency measurements by applying
calibration correction factors, these features should be activated).
3.2.3.2
Data Reduction, Analysis, and Results
Using the data recorded at Annex D the mean and standard deviation of the frequency
differences for each EIRP should be calculated and recorded as indicated in sample Table 3-3
and graphed as depicted at Figure 3-3. Measurements which have large differences may be
removed from the data set if the measurement error can be explained by a known
phenomenon which degraded the GEOLUT's ability to produce a valid measurement.
EIRP
(dBm)
Calculated C/No at
GEOLUT
(dBHz)
Avg Freq Measurement Error
(Hz rounded to 1 decimal place)
Std Deviation of Error
(Hz)
28.0
.
.
37.0
Table 3-3: Sample Table for Objective T-3 Results
3 - 11
Figure 3-3:
Graphs Depicting Frequency Measurement Accuracy Performance
3.2.4 T-4: INSAT GEOLUT Channel Capacity
The definition of capacity in Cospas-Sarsat GEOSAR systems is the number of 406 MHz
distress beacons operating simultaneously in the field of view of a GEOSAR satellite, that
can be successfully processed by the System to provide a valid beacon message, under
nominal conditions, within 5 minutes of beacon activation 95% of the time, and the number
of beacons that can be successfully processed within 10 minutes of beacon activation 98% of
the time. The applicable nominal conditions are described in document C/S T.012, Cospas-
Sarsat 406 MHz Frequency Management Plan, except that the uplink EIRP will be set to
34 dBm.
3.2.4.1
Methodology and Data Collection
The INSAT GEOSAR channel capacity is determined by generating traffic loads equivalent
to known numbers of simultaneously active long format beacons in a Cospas-Sarsat 406 MHz
channel. The time required for the GEOLUT to produce a valid beacon message, complete
message and confirm a complete message for each beacon event is recorded. The number of
simultaneously occurring beacon events is changed and the time required for the GEOLUT to
produce valid, complete and complete confirmed messages are calculated and recorded for
the new 406 MHz traffic load.
The test scripts transmitted by the beacon simulator should conform to the nominal
conditions detailed in document C/S T.012, with the exception that the uplink EIRP will be
34 dBm. Specifically, the test shall replicate a number of beacon messages overlapping in
time and frequency commensurate with the number of simultaneously active beacons.
Further, the beacon events used in the test script shall also replicate the beacon burst
repetition period defined in document C/S T.001 (406 MHz beacon specification). The test
shall be scheduled to avoid any potential interference caused by Cospas-Sarsat LEOSAR
satellite downlink transmissions.
28 29 30 … 37
EIRP
Avg Freq Measurement Error
(Hz)
Standard Deviation Measurement Error
(Hz)
28 29 30 … 37
EIRP
3 - 12
The test will replicate scenarios of 15, 20, and 25 simultaneously active beacons.
Performance of this test requires the following steps.
a.
A beacon simulator test script is developed which replicates 15 simultaneously active
beacons, with each beacon event having a unique ID. The transmitted signals for all
beacon events shall conform to the nominal conditions stated in the in the Cospas-
Sarsat 406 MHz Frequency Management Plan (C/S T.012), except that the uplink
power will be set to 34 dBm. The test signals will be transmitted with a carrier
frequency of 406.063 MHz. Since the distribution of beacon event start times and
transmit frequencies shall be in accordance with the nominal conditions described
document C/S T.012, the test script will include instances where beacon bursts
overlap in time and frequency. Each beacon event shall replicate a beacon being
active for a 15 minute period.
b.
Ensuring that the GEOLUTs will not be in the downlink footprint of a Cospas-Sarsat
LEOSAR satellite, the test script is transmitted.
c.
For each beacon event the time that the GEOLUT produced the first valid message,
first complete message and first confirmed complete message should be recorded in
the tabular format provided at Annex E.
d.
Repeat test with a different test script which also replicates 15 active beacons, until 10
different test scripts have been transmitted.
e.
Repeat the process above for scenarios in which the beacon simulator replicates 20
and 25 simultaneously active beacons.
3.2.4.2
Data Reduction, Analysis and Results
Using the data collected at Annex E, Table 3-4 should be completed for each simulated traffic
load (e.g. the 10 repetitions of the test script for 15 active beacons are consolidated to provide
the data in a single row of the table).
Channel: 406.063
# of Active
Bcn Events
% Valid Msg
within 5 Min
% Valid Msg
within10 Min
% Valid Msg
within 15 Min
% Confirmed
Complete Msg within
15 Min
Table 3-4: Sample Table for Capacity Statistics
From the data in Table 3-4, the percentage of beacon events which produced valid messages
within 5, 10 and 15 minutes of the start of the beacon event, and also the percentage of
confirmed complete messages, should be graphed against the respective beacon channel
3 - 13
population as indicated at Figure 3-4. As described below, the capacity of the channel is
determined by evaluating the number of active beacons corresponding to the 95th percentile
of the 5 minute curve and the 98th percentile of the 10 minute curve. Since the capacity of the
channel must satisfy both the 5 and 10 minute criteria, the lowest of these two figures is the
channel capacity.
Figure 3-4: Graph Depicting INSAT GEOSAR Capacity
In the fictitious example above, the 0.95 probability in 5 minutes would be the most stringent
criteria, and, therefore, defines the capacity as being approximately 26.5 active beacons.
3.2.4.3
Interpretation, Conclusion and Recommendation
The results of these tests will provide an estimate of the capacity a single channel in the
INSAT GEOSAR system. It is recommended that these results be used to validate the
GEOLUT capacity models being developed for the 406 MHz Frequency Management Plan.
3.2.5 T-5: Impact of Interference
The purpose of this objective is to determine the ability of the GEOSAR system to provide
valid messages in the presence of interference and noise. In view of the specialized test
equipment required to conduct this objective.
3.2.5.1
Methodology and Data Collection
This objective will use both real alerts and controlled test beacons to determine the impact of
actual interferers seen in the GEOSAR field of view when interference is present. It will also
0.94
0.95
0.96
0.97
0.98
0.99
1.0
5 Minute Valid Msg Curve
10 Minute Valid Msg Curve
15 Minute Valid Msg Curve
15 Minute Confirmed
Complete Msg Curve
Probability
Number of Simultaneously Active Beacons Per Channel
3 - 14
examine the relationship between the characteristics of the interfering signals and any
changes in the production of valid messages.
The following methodology should be used.
a.
Characterize the interference by using a spectrum analyser and a data storage device
to permit detailed analysis of the interfering signal at a later time than its occurrence.
The following test set up could be used (see Figure 3-5):
b.
Monitor the GEOSAR band using the spectrum analyser. Record the output in a
storage device for later detailed analysis. Photographs, data plots, or spectrographs
could be used for this purpose.
c.
When interference is detected the following parameters concerning the interfering
signal should be collected.
i) The identification of the GEOLUT.
ii) Time of occurrence and the duration of the interfering signal.
iii) Spectral occupancy.
iv) Signal strength.
v) Time patterns (e.g. on/off versus continuous, sweeping versus constant, etc.).
vi) Nature of modulation (analogue versus digital).
INSAT
SATELLITE
SIGNAL
INSAT GEOLUT
PROCESSOR
SPECTRUM
ANALYZER
STORAGE
DEVICE
ALERT
MESSAGES
INTERFERER
CHARACTERIZATION
DATA
PHOTOGRAPHS, PLOTS,
OR SPECTOGRAPHS
Figure 3-5: Test Set-up for Interference Evaluation
3 - 15
vii) Location of the interferer (if known).
During periods of interference the production of valid messages by the GEOSAR
processor should be evaluated. Any loss of messages, the production of invalid
messages or increases in the message transfer time should be noted.
3.2.5.2
Data Reduction, Analysis and Results
When interference is detected, all GEOSAR messages during the period should be examined
to determine if there is:
a.
a loss of expected messages;
b.
a decrease in the number of valid messages from operational and test beacons before
and after the occurrence of the interference; and
c.
an increase in processing anomalies.
Examine the technical parameters of the interferer and try to relate the impact on the message
processing to specific characteristics of the interferer. For example, is there a relationship
between the rate of reduction in valid messages to the interferer's signal strength?
3.2.6 T-6: Processing Anomalies (PA)
This test assesses GEOLUT performance in respect of its ability to suppress the processing
anomalies produced.
3.2.6.1
Methodology and Data Collection
This test is conducted by monitoring the 406 MHz channel (406.022 MHz) used by Cospas-
Sarsat reference beacon from the Kergulian Island2, and noting instances where the GEOLUT
produced valid beacon messages which did not correspond to any of the reference beacons in
the coverage area of the INSAT-3A satellite. Since the identifications (IDs) of all reference
beacons in view of the INSAT satellite are known, it can be inferred that beacons detected in
the 406.022 MHz channel which do not correspond to known reference beacons are
processing anomalies. The following test methodology and data collection requirements
apply:
a.
Note the 15 hexadecimal identification of all the reference beacons in the coverage
area of the INSAT satellite.
b.
Monitor the 406 MHz channel used by Cospas-Sarsat reference beacons for a 4 week
period, and note each instance of the GEOLUT producing a processing anomaly. For
each processing anomaly note the date and time that it was produced by the
2 The details of the Kerguelen Island beacon are as follow: Hex ID: 9C7EC2AACD3590, Country France,
Location: 49o21.09’ S 070o15.36’ E, Freq: 406.021856, Tramission interval: 30 sec.
3 - 16
GEOLUT, the 15 Hex ID and the 30 Hex beacon message reported by the GEOLUT,
and whether there was interference from a LEOSAR satellite at the time the PA was
produced (an example of the table for collecting this data is provided at Annex F).
3.2.6.2
Data Reduction, Analysis and Results
a.
Identify those valid messages that were processing anomalies (their 15 Hex ID did not
correspond to the 15 Hex ID of any of the reference beacons in the coverage area of
the INSAT satellite).
b.
For each processing anomaly, determine if the GEOLUT was in the coverage area of
a LEOSAR satellite at the time the alert was produced. This information will be used
to develop statistics which will provide an indication of whether LEOSAR
interference impacts upon GEOLUT processing anomaly performance.
c.
For each processing anomaly, attempt to determine the source (i.e. reference beacon)
of the transmission. This is done by converting the GEOLUT produced message into
its binary representation, and comparing it with bit-shifted versions of all the
reference beacons in the INSAT coverage area. If the bits of the processing anomaly
message correspond to 80% or more of a reference beacon message, then it could be
assumed that the processing anomaly was generated from the GEOLUT processing of
transmissions from that reference beacon.
d.
Record the results in the table provided at Annex F, and copied below:
15 Hex ID Produced
by GEOLUT
15 Hex ID of
Associated Reference
Beacon
Beacon Message
Produced by
GEOLUT (30 Hex)
Date /
Time
LUT in LEO
Footprint
(Y/N)
e.
Calculate the PA rate as a function of beacon bursts in the coverage area of the
INSAT satellite. This is calculated with the following equation:
f.
Calculate the PA rate when the GEOLUT is in the footprint of a LEOSAR satellite
using the following equation.


Area
Coverage
INSAT
in
Day
per
Bursts
Beacon
Reference
of
Number
\*
Observed
Days
of
Number
PAs
of
Number
Total


Area
Coverage
INSAT
in
Day
per
Bursts
Beacon
Reference
of
Number
\*
Days
in
Cov
LEO
of
Duration
Total
Cov
LEO
during
PAs
of
Number
Total
3 - 17
3.2.7 T-7: INSAT Coverage
The coverage of the INSAT GEOSAR system is evaluated using a combination of:
a.
technical tests, in which a beacon is activated for a period of time, during which it
crosses in or out of the INSAT GEOSAR coverage area; and
b.
evaluating real beacon alerts detected by the LEOSAR system, and assessing if the
same alerts were detected by the INSAT GEOSAR system.
3.2.7.1
Methodology and Data Collection
Testing Using Beacon Crossing Coverage Area
A beacon will be mounted on a vessel or vehicle which will be crossing the expected INSAT
GEOSAR coverage area. After the beacon has been activated, the beacon operator will
record its location as a function of time. The INSAT GEOLUT operator will monitor the
output of its GEOLUT for the test period, and record the times associated with the production
of all valid messages for the test beacon.
Evaluating Coverage Area Using Real Beacon Events of Opportunity
The location and times of real beacon events detected by the LEOSAR system during the
period of the INSAT GEOSAR Performance testing are to be identified. Beacon events
located within an area enclosed by 80 latitude and longitude should be recorded in the
format provided at Annex G. The beacon ID and time of each alert in the sample set are to be
compared against the GEOLUT output to determine if the event was also detected by the
INSAT GEOSAR system.
3.2.7.2
Data Reduction, Analysis and Results
Testing Using Beacon Crossing Coverage Area
From the data collected, the time that INSAT GEOSAR coverage was lost (or began
depending whether the beacon was moving in or out of coverage) is to be recorded. The
movement of the beacon during the test period is to be plotted on a map, and the plot is to be
annotated to depict GEO coverage / no GEO coverage. From the collected data, the
estimated latitude and longitude of the last valid message detected by the GEOLUT before
the beacon left coverage, should be provided.
Evaluating Coverage Area Using Real Beacon Events of Opportunity
a.
all the LEOSAR alerts detected during the period of the INSAT Performance
evaluation that satisfy the criteria for inclusion in the sample set should be recorded in
the format provided at Annex G (i.e., situated within an area enclosed by 80 latitude
and longitude);
3 - 18
b.
each beacon event in the sample set should be checked to determine if it was also
detected by the INSAT GEOLUT, and the results recorded as per Annex G;
c.
the beacon events are to be grouped into geographic areas of 10 latitude/longitude
blocks;
d.
for each block, the percentage of LEOSAR beacon events that were also detected by
the GEOLUT should be calculated and presented as indicated at Table 3-5 below; and
e.
the location of each beacon event should be plotted on two maps, one depicting events
that were detected by both the LEOSAR and GEOLUT, and a separate map depicting
beacon events detected only by the LEOSAR system.
Block Location
Number of
LEOSAR
Beacon Events
Number
Detected by
GEOLUT
% Detected by
GEOLUT
Longitude
Latitude
0/10w
0/10n
10w/20w
0/10n
20w/30w
0/10n
.
.
.
.
.
.
70e/80e
70s/80s
Table 3-5: Sample Table of Coverage Statistics
3.2.8 C-1: Commissionning of the INSAT GEOLUT
The downlink antennas of the INSAT-3A satellite has directive beams that can be only
received in the Indian region. Currently, the only GEOLUT attached to the INSAT satellite is
located in Bangalore. Part of the INSAT GEOSAR performance evaluation plan include the
verification of the compliance of INSAT GEOLUT with the performance specification
(C/S T.009).
Document C/S T.010 provides the detailed testing and reporting requirements for the
commissioning of the Cospas-Sarsat INSAT GEOLUT. The annexes of the documents define
the test data format requirements and the content and format of the commissioning report
which is to be submitted to the Cospas-Sarsat Secretariat.
Commissioning reports are reviewed separately by the Cospas-Sarsat Joint Committee and
approved by the Cospas-Sarsat Council.
- END OF SECTION 3 -
4 - 1
4.
REPORTING GUIDELINES
The Indian GEOLUT operator participating in the INSAT GEOSAR Performance Evaluation
Programme shall submit an individual report to the Cospas-Sarsat Secretariat. The report
should follow the structure described in Annex A, using the same section paragraph
numbering and annexes.
The Secretariat will retain the complete reports on file for archival purposes, and will format
each report into a summarized version for presentation to the Joint Committee. Based upon
the recommendations of the Joint Committee, a summary report of the performance of the
INSAT System will be produced for the consideration of the Cospas-Sarsat Council.
A separate Commissioning report (C-1) of the INSAT GEOLUT is to be submitted to the
Cospas-Sarsat Joint Committee by the appropriate Administration for review and
consideration.
- END OF SECTION 4 -
4 - 2
page left blank
________________________________________________________
ANNEXES TO THE
COSPAS-SARSAT
INSAT GEOSAR PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION PLAN
_________________________________________________________
A - 1
ANNEX A
FORMAT OF INSAT PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
REPORTS BY GEOLUT OPERATORS
A.1
INTRODUCTION
Introductory remarks provide information necessary to understand the report. The
introduction should identify which test objectives were completed and have been reported in
this document and any known deficiencies with the GEOLUT which could affect the results.
Furthermore, the introduction shall provide:
a.
the dates covered by the test programme;
b.
the location of the GEOLUT; and
c.
the configuration settings of the GEOLUT which could impact upon its observed
performance (e.g. the bandwidth settings of the GEOLUT receiver).
A.2
SUMMARY OF RESULTS
This section will provide summary statements concerning the results of each objective. It
should specifically identify any difficulties experienced with the evaluation programme and
any recommendations that should be noted by the Joint Committee.
A.3
TEST T-1: PROCESSING THRESHOLD, SYSTEM MARGIN AND
BEACON MESSAGE PROCESSING PERFORMANCE
A.3.1 Test Description
This section should include a statement confirming that the tests were conducted and
analysed in accordance with C/S R.014, or describe any modifications to the test procedures
that were required.
A.3.2 Calculation of C/No
The calculations converting the EIRP of the simulator, to a C/No value at the GEOLUT
processor should be provided.
A.3.3 Test Results
The GEOLUT data collected for this test should be included as an annex to the report, and
referenced in this section of the report. In addition, the tables below should be produced
based on the collected data and provided in this section of the national report.
A - 2
Analysed Data for Test T-1
EIRP
from
simulator
(dBm)
Calculated
C/No at
GEOLUT
(dBHz)
Number of
Beacon Events
Used (Valid
Msg Sample
Set)
Number of Beacon Events for
which
Probability
of Valid
Message
Probability
of Valid
Message
within 5
Min
Valid Message
was Produced
Valid Message
was Produced
within 5 Min
28.0
29.0
30.0
31.0
32.0
33.0
34.0
35.0
36.0
37.0
1.00
1.00
EIRP
from
simulator
(dBm)
Number of
Beacon Events
Used
(Complete
Msg Sample
Set)
Number of
Beacon Events
Used
(Confirmed
Complete Msg
Sample Set)
Number of
Beacon Events
for which a
Complete
Message was
Produced
Number of Beacon
Events for which a
Confirmed
Complete Message
was Produced
Probability of
Complete /
Confirmed
Complete
Msg
28.0
29.0
30.0
31.0
32.0
33.0
34.0
35.0
36.0
37.0
1.00
1.00 / 1.00
A.3.4 Processing Threshold and Message Processing Performance
A graph of the results from the tables above should be included (a theoretical example is
provided herein). The processing threshold value should be highlighted by noting the value
of C/No corresponding to a 0.99 probability of obtaining a valid message as indicated below.
Similarly the processing performance is determined from the graph depicting C/No versus the
probability of producing a valid message within 5 minutes.
A - 3
A.3.5 System Margin
The calculations converting the threshold value of C/No to the associated EIRP, and the
resulting system margin should be provided.
A.3.6 Test Anomalies
This section should provide information concerning issues which occurred during the test
which could affect results. If some data was excluded from the results, an explanation should
be provided.
Processing Threshold and System Margin
C/No
EIRP
37 dBm
Processing Threshold
System
Margin
1.0 .99 .98 .97 .96 .95
Probability of Valid Message
Valid Message Processing Performance
C/No
EIRP
Processing Performance
1.0 .99 .98 .97 .96 .95
Probability of Valid Message within 5 min
Long Message Processing Performance
C/No
EIRP
Confirmed Complete
Complete
1.0 .99 .98 .97 .96 .95
Probability of Successful Message Processing
A - 4
A.3.7 Recommendations
Any proposed recommendations resulting from this test should be detailed in this section.
A.4
TEST T-2: TIME TO PRODUCE VALID, COMPLETE AND CONFIRMED
MESSAGES
A.4.1 Test Description
This section should include a statement confirming that the tests were conducted and
analysed in accordance with C/S R.014, or describe any modifications to the test procedures
that were required.
A.4.2 Test Results
The results for this test are obtained by analysing the data that was collected for the T-1 Test.
A reference should be provided to indicate the annex of the report where this data is
provided. From the data, the table and graphs described below should be produced and
included in this section of the report. In addition to the mean time to produce valid, complete
and confirmed complete messages for each EIRP, the standard deviation for each of these
statistics should also be calculated and provided.
EIRP
(dBm)
C/No
(dBHz)
ATVM
(Sec)
Standard Deviation
of ATVM
ATCM
(Sec)
Standard Deviation
of ATCM
ATCCM
(Sec)
Standard Deviation
of ATCCM
28.0
29.0
.
.
37.0
EIRP
(dBm)
C/No
(dBHz)
95th Percentile
98th Percentile
Valid Msg
(Sec)
Complete Msg
(Sec)
Confirmed Msg
(Sec)
Valid Msg
(Sec)
Complete Msg
(Sec)
Confirmed Msg
(Sec)
28.0
29.0
.
.
37.0
A - 5
A.4.3Test Anomalies
Average Time to Produce Valid, Complete and Confirmed Complete Messages
C/No
EIRP
Confirmed Complete (ATCCM)
Complete (ATCM)
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Seconds After First Burst of Beacon Event
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Number of Bursts Required
Valid (ATVM)
95th Percentile to Produce Valid, Complete and Confirmed Complete Messages
C/No
EIRP
Confirmed Complete
Complete
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Seconds After First Burst of Beacon Event
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Number of Bursts Required
Valid
98th Percentile to Produce Valid, Complete and Confirmed Complete Messages
C/No
EIRP
Confirmed Complete
Complete
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Seconds After First Burst of Beacon Event
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Number of Bursts Required
Valid
A - 6
This section should provide information concerning issues which occurred during the test
which could affect results. If some data was excluded from the results, an explanation should
be provided.
A.4.4 Recommendations
Any proposed recommendations resulting from this test should be detailed in this section.
A.5
TEST T-3: CARRIER FREQUENCY MEASUREMENT ACCURACY
A.5.1 Test Description
This section should include a statement confirming that the tests were conducted and
analysed in accordance with C/S R.014, or describe any modifications to the test procedures
that were required.
A.5.2 Test Results
The results for this test are obtained by analysing the data that was collected for the T-1 Test,
to obtain the average frequency measurement error and standard deviation of this error, for
each EIRP. A reference should be provided to indicate the annex of the report where this
data is provided. The results of these calculations should be presented in tabular and
graphical formats as indicated below.
EIRP
(dBm)
Calculated C/No at
GEOLUT (dBHz)
Avg Freq Measurement Error
(Hz rounded to 1 decimal place)
Std Deviation of Error
(Hz)
28.0
.
.
37.0
28 29 30 … 37
EIRP
Avg Freq Measurement Error
(Hz)
Standard Deviation Freq
Measurement Error
(Hz)
28 29 30 … 37
EIRP
A - 7
A.5.3 Test Anomalies
This section should provide information concerning issues which occurred during the test
which could affect results. If some data was excluded from the results, an explanation should
be provided.
A.5.4 Recommendations
Any proposed recommendations resulting from this test should be detailed in this section.
A.6
TEST T-4: INSAT GEOLUT CHANNEL CAPACITY
A.6.1 Test Description
This section should include a statement confirming that the tests were conducted and
analysed in accordance with C/S R.014, or describe any modifications to the test procedures
that were required.
A.6.2 Test Results
The GEOLUT data collected for this test should be included as an annex to the report, and
should be referenced in this section of the report. From the data collected, the table and
graph depicted below should be provided, and the capacity calculated and reported in this
section of the report.
Channel: 406.063
# of Active
Bcn
Events
% Valid Msg
within 5 Min
% Valid Msg
within10 Min
% Valid Msg
within 15 Min
% Confirmed
Complete Msg within
15 Min
A - 8
A.6.3 Test Anomalies
This section should provide information concerning issues which occurred during the test
which could affect results. If some data was excluded from the results, an explanation should
be provided.
A.6.4 Recommendations
Any proposed recommendations resulting from this test should be detailed in this section.
A.7
TEST T-5: IMPACT OF INTERFERENCE
This objective is not accomplished through a controlled test, but rather by monitoring the
performance of the GEOLUT throughout the period of the entire INSAT performance
evaluation programme, during which time it is anticipated that there will be periods of
interference. In view of the unstructured nature of this process it is not possible to predict
what information will be collected, the detailed analysis which will be required, nor define
the structure for reporting the results in advance.
406.063 MHz Channel Capacity
0.94
0.95
0.96
0.97
0.98
0.99
1.0
5 Minute Valid Msg Curve
10 Minute Valid Msg Curve
15 Minute Valid Msg Curve
15 Minute Confirmed
Complete Msg Curve
Probability
Number of Simultaneously Active Beacons Per Channel
A - 9
In view of the above, for administrations which participated in this test objective, a
description of the configuration used to detect and measure interference should be provided.
In addition, the data collected for this objective should be provided as an annex to the report.
Finally any data reduction and/or analysis conducted should be described and the results
reported.
A.8
TEST T-6: PROCESSING ANOMALIES
A.8.1 Test Description
This section should include a statement confirming that the tests were conducted and
analysed in accordance with C/S R.014, or describe any modifications to the test procedures
that were required.
A.8.2 Test Results
An entry should be made in the table provided at Annex F (a copy of the format of the table is
provided below) for each instance when the GEOLUT produced a valid message which
satisfied both conditions stated below:
a.
the bias frequency calculated by the GEOLUT confirmed the transmission occurred in
the channel reserved for reference beacons [406.022 MHz]; and
b.
the 15 Hex ID of the valid message produced by the GEOLUT did not match any of
the 15 Hex IDs of reference beacons operating in the MSG coverage area.
15 Hex ID
Produced by
GEOLUT
15 Hex ID of
Associated
Reference Beacon
Beacon Message
Produced by
GEOLUT
(30 Hex)
Date /
Time
LUT in LEO
Footprint
(Y/N)
Table for Recording 406 MHz Processing Anomalies (extracted from Annex F)
A.8.3 Processing Anomaly Rate (PA)
The PA rate and the PA rate when the GEOLUT was in the footprint of a LEOSAR satellite
should be calculated and reported.
A.8.4 Test Anomalies
This section should provide information concerning issues which occurred during the test
which could affect results. If some data was excluded from the results, an explanation should
be provided.
A - 10
A.8.5 Recommendations
Any proposed recommendations resulting from this test should be detailed in this section.
A.9
Test T-7: INSAT COVERAGE
A.9.1 Test Description
This section should include a statement confirming that the tests were conducted and
analysed in accordance with C/S R.014, or describe any modifications to the test procedures
that were required.
A.9.2 Test Results
Beacon Crossing Coverage Area
a.
A narrative description of the test should provided, indicating the route taken, the
beacon identification, and the times associated with the activation and deactivation of
the beacon.
b.
The GEOLUT performance in respect of producing valid messages, as a function of
time and elevation angle (as indicated below) should be provided.
c.
The results provided in the table should be graphically depicted on a map.
Beacon 15 Hex ID:
Activation Date / Time:
De-activation Date / Time:
Date / Time
Location (Lat/Long)
Beacon to Satellite
Elevation Angle
Detected by
GEOLUT (Yes/No)
Evaluating Coverage Using Real Beacon Events
a.
All beacon events detected by the LEOSAR system in the area enclosed by 80 N/S
and 80 E/W, shall be recorded as per Annex G, and an indication of whether the
beacon event was also detected by the INSAT GEOLUT.
b.
Using the data captured at Annex G, beacon events are to be grouped into geographic
locations of 10 latitude/longitude blocks, and the associated statistics calculated as
follow.
A - 11
Block Location
Number of
LEOSAR
Beacon Events
Number
Detected by
GEOLUT
% Detected by
GEOLUT
Longitude
Latitude
0/10w
0/10n
10w/20w
0/10n
20w/30w
0/10n
.
.
.
.
.
.
70e/80e
70s/80s
c.
Two maps of the data collected as per Annex G should be produced. One map
depicting each beacon event that was detected by the LEOSAR and also by the INSAT
GEOLUT, and the second map depicting each beacon event that was only detected by
the LEOSAR system.
A.9.3 Test Anomalies
This section should provide information concerning issues which occurred during the test
which could affect results. If some data was excluded from the results, an explanation should
be provided.
A.9.4 Recommendations
Any proposed recommendations resulting from this test should be detailed in this section.
List of Annexes (electronic copies of annexes to be provided to Secretariat separately)
Annex A
GEOLUT Data Collected for Objectives T-1, T-2, and T-3;
Annex B
GEOLUT Data Collected for Objective T-4;
Annex C
GEOLUT Data Collected for Objective T-6; and
Annex D
GEOLUT Data Collected for Objective T-7
- END OF ANNEX A -
A - 12
Page left blank
B - 1
ANNEX B
TEST SCRIPTS FOR OBJECTIVES
T-1, T-2 AND T-3
Introduction
This annex provides a description of the test signals that will be transmitted by the French
simulator for objectives T-1, T-2 and T-3.
Each script includes 50 different beacons that transmit 20 beacon bursts with a fixed burst
repetition interval of 50 sec. In total there are 1000 beacon emissions per script (50 beacon
events). The first 50 beacon emissions of the test script for uplink signals with EIRPs of 28
dBm are proved below.
The scripts for the other EIRPs will be identical to this example except that the beacon event
IDs transmitted will be coded with the appropriate EIRP value. Copies of the test scripts for
EIRP values from 28 to 37 dBm are available from the Cospas-Sarsat Secretariat on request.
The 15 Hex ID f each beacon event conforms to the following convention:
9C5C000 XXX 0000 XX
Fixed Values
For all Beacon
Events
Beacon Event
Serial 004 through
200 modulo 4
Transmit
EIRP
Fixed Values
For all Beacon
Events
B- 2
Table B-1: Test script for Test T-1, T-2 and T-3
15 Hex ID of Bcn Event
30 Hex Msg of Bcn Event
Time of First
Burst in Bcn
Event
Tx Freq (Hz)
9C5C00004000028
CE2E0000200001452F4C00100002C1
To
9C5C00008000028
CE2E0000400001447A8F40100002C1
To+1
9C5C00012000028
CE2E0000900001426C6AC0100002C1
To+2
9C5C00016000028
CE2E0000B0000142A0D400100002C1
To+3
9C5C00020000028
CE2E0001000001438604C0100002C1
To+4
9C5C00024000028
CE2E0001200001434ABA00100002C1
To+5
9C5C00028000028
CE2E0001400001421F7940100002C1
To+6
9C5C00032000028
CE2E000190000144099CC0100002C1
To+7
9C5C00036000028
CE2E0001B0000144C52200100002C1
To+8
9C5C00040000028
CE2E0002000001409E6600100002C1
To+9
9C5C00044000028
CE2E00022000014052D8C0100002C1
To+10
9C5C00048000028
CE2E000240000141071B80100002C1
To+11
9C5C00052000028
CE2E00029000014711FE00100002C1
To+12
9C5C00056000028
CE2E0002B0000147DD40C0100002C1
To+13
9C5C00060000028
CE2E000300000146FB9000100002C1
To+14
9C5C00064000028
CE2E000320000146372EC0100002C1
To+15
9C5C00068000028
CE2E00034000014762ED80100002C1
To+16
9C5C00072000028
CE2E000390000141740800100002C1
To+17
9C5C00076000028
CE2E0003B0000141B8B6C0100002C1
To+18
9C5C00080000028
CE2E000400000146AEA380100002C1
To+19
9C5C00084000028
CE2E000420000146621D40100002C1
To+20
9C5C00088000028
CE2E00044000014737DE00100002C1
To+21
9C5C00092000028
CE2E000490000141213B80100002C1
To+22
9C5C00096000028
CE2E0004B0000141ED8540100002C1
To+23
9C5C00100000028
CE2E000800000143795040100002C1
To+24
9C5C00104000028
CE2E000820000143B5EE80100002C1
To+25
9C5C00108000028
CE2E000840000142E02DC0100002C1
To+26
9C5C00112000028
CE2E000890000144F6C840100002C1
To+27
9C5C00116000028
CE2E0008B00001443A7680100002C1
To+28
9C5C00120000028
CE2E0009000001451CA640100002C1
To+29
9C5C00124000028
CE2E000920000145D01880100002C1
To+30
9C5C00128000028
CE2E00094000014485DBC0100002C1
To+31
9C5C00132000028
CE2E000990000142933E40100002C1
To+32
9C5C00136000028
CE2E0009B00001425F8080100002C1
To+33
9C5C00140000028
CE2E000A0000014604C480100002C1
To+34
9C5C00144000028
CE2E000A20000146C87A40100002C1
To+35
9C5C00148000028
CE2E000A400001479DB900100002C1
To+36
9C5C00152000028
CE2E000A900001418B5C80100002C1
To+37
9C5C00156000028
CE2E000AB000014147E240100002C1
To+38
9C5C00160000028
CE2E000B00000140613280100002C1
To+39
9C5C00164000028
CE2E000B20000140AD8C40100002C1
To+40
9C5C00168000028
CE2E000B40000141F84F00100002C1
To+41
9C5C00172000028
CE2E000B90000147EEAA80100002C1
To+42
9C5C00176000028
CE2E000BB0000147221440100002C1
To+43
9C5C00180000028
CE2E000C00000140340100100002C1
To+44
9C5C00184000028
CE2E000C20000140F8BFC0100002C1
To+45
9C5C00188000028
CE2E000C40000141AD7C80100002C1
To+46
9C5C00192000028
CE2E000C90000147BB9900100002C1
To+47
9C5C00196000028
CE2E000CB00001477727C0100002C1
To+48
9C5C00200000028
CE2E00100000014160CF00100002C1
To+49
EIRP 28 dBm
B- 3
- END OF ANNEX B -
C - 1
ANNEX C
TEST SCRIPTS FOR OBJECTIVE T-4
(Channel Capacity)
Introduction
This annex provides a description of the test signals that will be transmitted by the French
simulator for objective T-4.
Each script includes 15, 20, or 25 different beacons that transmit 18 beacon bursts with a fixed burst
repetition interval of 50 seconds. Each beacon event is comprised of 18 beacon bursts, which may
overlap in time. The start of time of the first beacon burst for each beacon event is provided in the
table. To obtain sufficient statistics 10 different scripts for each beacon population will be
transmitted. The beginning of one script simulating 15 simultaneously active beacons is
provided below.
The 15 Hex ID of each beacon event conforms to the following convention:
9C5C00 C XX XX X 0 34
.
.
Table C-1: Test script for Test T-4
- END OF ANNEX C -
15 Hex ID of Bcn Event
30 Hex Msg of Bcn Event
Time of First
Burst in Bcn
Event
Tx Freq (Hz)
9C5C00C15011034
CE2E0060A80881A5224C00100002C1
To
9C5C00C15151034
CE2E0060A8A881A475A100100002C1
To + 4,14 s
9C5C00C15041034
CE2E0060A82081A577B740100002C1
To + 7,62 s
9C5C00C15101034
CE2E0060A88081A4205A40100002C1
To + 8,28 s
9C5C00C15061034
CE2E0060A83081A555D3C0100002C1
To + 8,72 s
9C5C00C15071034
CE2E0060A83881A544E180100002C1
To + 10,85 s
9C5C00C15031034
CE2E0060A81881A5002880100002C1
To + 11,92 s
9C5C00C15081034
CE2E0060A84081A5BAEC40100002C1
To + 12,05 s
9C5C00C15111034
CE2E0060A88881A4316800100002C1
To + 16,38 s
9C5C00C15021034
CE2E0060A81081A5111AC0100002C1
To + 18,22 s
9C5C00C15091034
CE2E0060A84881A5ABDE00100002C1
To + 20,02 s
9C5C00C15051034
CE2E0060A82881A5668500100002C1
To + 24,51 s
9C5C00C15131034
CE2E0060A89881A4130C80100002C1
To + 33,13 s
9C5C00C15141034
CE2E0060A8A081A4649340100002C1
To + 42,73 s
9C5C00C15121034
CE2E0060A89081A4023EC0100002C1
To + 45,31 s
Fixed
Values for
all Beacon
“C”
Indicating
Capacity
Number of
Active Beacons
15, 20 or 25
Script Sequence
Identifier (1
through A)
Fixed
Values for
all Beacon
Beacon
Event
Serial
Transmit
EIRP
C- 2
page left blank
D - 1
ANNEX D
DATA TO BE COLLECTED FOR OBJECTIVES T-1, T-2 AND T-3
Introduction
This annex provides a description of the data to be recorded for each beacon even transmitted by the simulator for objectives T-1, T-2 and
T-3. This information provides the foundation for the analysis and conclusions provided in the body of the report.
The table below combines information obtained from the simulator operator, with data collected by the GEOLUT under test. Each row in
the table represents a single beacon event. It should be included as an annex in the INSAT Performance Evaluation Report provided by
the INSAT GEOLUT operator.
Table E-1: Results for Test T-1, T-2 and T-3
- END OF ANNEX D -
EIRP (dBm)______________Date/Time of First Busrt in Test Script Run 1_______________________
15 Hex ID
Tx by
Simulator
Time of
First Burst
in Bcn Event
Time GEOLUT
provided first
Valid Msg
First Valid
Msg C/No
Measured by
GEOLUT
(dBHz)
Time
GEOLUT
provided
first
Complete
Msg
First
Complete Msg
C/No
Measured by
GEOLUT
(dBHz)
Time
GEOLUT
Confirmed
Complete
Msg
Confirmed
Complete Msg
C/No Measured by
GEOLUT (dBHz)
Freq.
Transmitted
(Hz)
Calibrated
freq. Measured
by GEOLUT
for first Valid
Msg (Hz)
D – 2
page left blank
E- 1
ANNEX E
DATA TO BE COLLECTED FOR OBJECTIVE T-4
Introduction
This annex provides a description of the data which should be recorded for each beacon event transmitted by the simulator for objective T-4.
This information provides the foundation for the analysis and conclusions provided in the body of the report.
The table below combines information obtained from the simulator operator, with data collected by the GEOLUT under test. Each row in the
table represents a single beacon event.
A separate table should be provided for each run of a test script (i.e. there should be 10 tables for each simulated traffic load).
These tables should be included as an annex in the INSAT Performance Evaluation Report provided by the INSAT GEOLUT operator.
- END OF ANNEX E -
Simulated Traffic Load (Number of simultaneously occurring beacon events)______________
Script Number ___ Date/Time of First Burst in Test Script Run 1____________
15 Hex
ID Tx
by
Simulat
or
Time of First
Burst in Bcn
Event
Time GEOLUT
provided First
Valid Msg
First Valid Msg
C/No Measured
by GEOLUT
(dBHz)
Time GEOLUT
provided first
Complete Msg
First Complete
Msg C/No
Measured by
GEOLUT
(dBHz)
Time GEOLUT
Confirmed
Complete Msg
Confirmed Complete
Msg C/No Measured
by GEOLUT (dBHz)
Frequency
E - 2
page left blank
F - 1
ANNEX F
DATA TO BE COLLECTED FOR OBJECTIVE T-6
Introduction
This annex provides a description of the data which should be recorded for each processing
anomaly noted in the 406 MHz channel reserved for reference beacons.
This table should be included as an annex in the INSAT Performance Evaluation Report
provided by the INSAT GEOLUT operator.
15 Hex ID
Produced by
GEOLUT
15 Hex ID of
Associated
Reference
Beacon
Beacon
Message
Produced by
GEOLUT
(30 Hex)
C/No of
Message as
Measured by
GEOLUT
(dBHz)
Date /
Time
LUT in
LEO
Footprint
(Y/N)
_________ = Total duration that the GEOLUT was in the footprint of a LEOSAR satellite
during the 4 week period of observation.
- END OF ANNEX F -
F - 2
page left blank
G - 1
ANNEX G
DATA TO BE COLLECTED FOR OBJECTIVE T-7
Introduction
This annex provides a description of the data which should be recorded for test T-7 (INSAT
Coverage), for the test using beacon events of opportunity.
This table should be included as an annex in the INSAT Performance Evaluation Report
provided by the INSAT GEOLUT operator.
15 Hex ID
Location Determined by
LEOSAR System
LEOSAR Detection
Time
Detected by
GEOLUT
(Yes / No)
- END OF ANNEX G -
G - 2
page left blank
H - 1
ANNEX H
INSAT GEOSAR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PROGRAMME SCHEDULE
-END OF ANNEX H -
H - 2
- END OF DOCUMENT -
______________________________________________
Cospas-Sarsat Secretariat
1250 René-Lévesque Blvd. West, Suite 4215, Montréal (Québec) H3B 4W8 Canada
Telephone: +1 514 500 7999
Fax: +1 514 500 7996
Email: mail@cospas-sarsat.int
Website: http://www.cospas-sarsat.int
______________________________________________
Reference in New Issue View Git Blame Copy Permalink