annex 1 - European Maritime Radionavigation Forum

ANNEX 1: MINUTES OF
MEETING
EMRF-GSA First Workshop on the
Maritime Use of EGNOS Report
Chairman: Mr. Martin Bransby (GLA) on behalf of Mr. Jacques Manchard (EMRF).
Workshop Date: 7 April.
Workshop Place: Bordeaux (France), pre-meeting ENC 2015.
Distribution list: EGNOS workshop distribution list.
1
INTRODUCTION
This document aims to summarize the relevant issues presented during the first Workshop on the
Maritime Use of EGNOS held the 7th of April 2015 at Bordeaux during the pre-meeting of ENC
2015.
This workshop has been co-organised by EMRF and GSA, and was chaired by Mr. Martin Bransby,
from The General Lighthouse Authorities of the United Kingdom and Ireland (GLA).
1.1 Agenda
The detailed agenda followed during this workshop is included below:
WORKSHOP AGENDA
13:30 – 13:40 Welcome
13:40 – 14:00 E-Navigation and user needs (EMRF)
14:00 – 14:20 Potential role of EGNOS (GSA)
14:20 – 15:30 Interactive session on open points to design EGNOS maritime services and adoption
roadmap:
a) Operational aspects (benefits for navigation in ocean and coastal waters, harbour
approaches/entrances and inland waterways)
b) Regulatory aspects (standardisation, certification, liability, etc.)
c) Implementation steps (window of opportunity before 2020, notification to the mariners, pilot
projects, cost benefit analysis at local level, promotion to ship-owners, etc.)
15:30 – 16:00 Summary of the interactive session results and way forward.
The discussions held under each point of the agenda are described in the following sections.
2
CONTENT
2.1 Welcome
Ms. Fiammetta Diani (GSA) welcomed the workshop attendees. She explained that GSA and
EMRF (GLA) have been working together since October 2013, in order to better understand
together the role of both EGNOS and Galileo for maritime use.
Fiammetta Diani briefly introduced the EGNOS system, remarking that it currently augments GPS,
but will be augmenting Galileo in the future, and also presented the GSA to the attendees.
Mr. Martin Bransby continued presenting the apologies from the EMRF actual Chair, Mr. Jacques
Manchard, who could not attend the meeting for medical reasons.
The welcome was ended with roundtable presentations. The complete list of attendees can be found
in Section 3 in this document.
2.2 e-Navigation and user needs (EMRF)
150407 GLA EMRF
presentation.pdf
The workshop continued with a presentation on e-Navigation by EMRF representative, Martin
Bransby.
Mr. Bransby presented the concept and status of e-Navigation.
e-Navigation is defined by the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) as: “the harmonized
collection, integration, exchange, presentation and analysis of maritime information on-board and
ashore by electronic means to enhance berth-to-berth navigation and related services, for safety
and security at sea and protection of the marine environment”.
Additionally, the IMO Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) recalls that the e-Navigation systems
should be resilient. These systems should take into account issues of data validity, plausibility and
integrity so as to be robust, reliable and dependable. Moreover, requirements for redundancy,
particularly in relation to position fixing systems should be considered, in order to guarantee
resilient PNT.
The Task T12 of the e-Navigation Strategic Implementation Plan (SIP) was mentioned: “Develop a
test bed demonstrating improved reliability and resilience of on-board PNT systems by integration
with external systems”.
e-Navigation needs (two) position inputs. To achieve resilient PNT a second independent
positioning source is required. This does not happen with the current systems.
The presentation highlighted that there are multiple systems (not only ECDIS) which require a
position input, and that GPS has become the normal means for maritime PNT.
-
Used on the ship: GPS, DGPS, AIS, ECDIS, GMDSS, DCS, RADAR, GYRO,[…]
-
Used in Aids to Navigation: AtoN deployment, DGNSS corrections,[…]
After this presentation, Mr. Roger Barker (Trinity House) remarked that resilience is a key issue for
the maritime community. Each maritime accident brings solutions that require more forms to be
filled in, more checklists to review […]; and they wonder if these solutions are really increasing the
safety of navigation as it is required. Mr. Barker commented that they now navigate using a single
source for position which they cannot fully trust. A secondary input is needed to guarantee
resilience, to avoid erroneous positions which may lead to accidents (which already happened).
The attendees commented that there are human errors (that will always be present), but if mariners
could have better assumptions on positions, some accidents could be avoided/prevented in a high
percentage.
2.3 Potential role of EGNOS (GSA)
GSA EGNOS
Exploitation maritime service.pptx
The workshop continued with a presentation on the potential role of EGNOS in the maritime
domain by Ms. Nathalie Ricard and Mr. Manuel Lopez, from the GSA.
Nathalie Ricard started presenting the EGNOS system. The EGNOS architecture was described and
how the corrections are computed and transmitted to the users. GPS corrections are calculated and
provided in the EGNOS signal for GPS satellite clock and ephemeris and for
Ionosphere/troposphere errors.
The integrity provided by the EGNOS system (Safety of Life Service - SoL) was highlighted,
indicating how the system is able to detect any anomaly in GPS and in the EGNOS system itself
and warns users within the Time To Alert (TTA) if an error exceeds the established thresholds.
EGNOS does this detection by calculating the user residual error for users on given geographical
grid points and checking that it is less than the specification (i.e. system internal check in the
control centre); if not, EGNOS raises an alarm to users in the signal-in-space (“do not use”).
Taking into consideration the models of all types of error at receiver level (orbit, clock, ionospheric,
tropospheric, multipath, airborne error, etc), there is a receiver standard developed for aviation
community that shows the algorithms to use in order to compute protection levels, which is the
region assured to contain the computed navigation position.
For the maritime community the definition of the appropriate algorithms/models to provide integrity
at user level is still pending. The estimation/modelling of the multipath and other error factors needs
to be done for the maritime community (standardised).
The three different EGNOS services currently available were also presented:
-
Safety of Life Service (SoL), designed for aviation;
-
Open Service (OS), for non safety-critical purposes (provided without service guarantee or
liability).
-
EGNOS Data Access Service (EDAS) for access to data via the internet.
Each service is provided within its respective service area, defined in the Service Definition
Document (SDD). Each service is provided free of end user charges.
Next, the development of the EGNOS Service for Maritime use was presented. Three different steps
or phases have been envisaged:
1. Use of EGNOS corrections via existing AtoN (e.g. IALA radiobeacons and AIS stations)
2. Adapt receivers to use EGNOS Signal in Space (SiS). This short-term option would require:
 The current SiS (EGNOS v2)
 Adapt receivers (standards)
3. Maritime safety message in SiS (if need be) and multi-system shipborne receiver. This longterm option would require:
 Use of EGNOS v3 SiS and Galileo
 New receivers (multi-system shipborne receivers)
 New maritime information in SiS (if needed)
Manuel Lopez continued explaining the value proposition of EGNOS for maritime navigation. He
explained that the EGNOS system as it is now (v2) can be used as a complement/back up of IALA
DGNSS in the following phases of navigation: Ocean waters, Coastal waters, harbour entrances and
approaches and Inland waterways.
Manuel Lopez commented that the use of EGNOS for port operations is still under study. Different
users, including Harbour Masters, Pilots Associations and Portable Pilot Units manufacturers will
be contacted to evaluate this possibility.
Manuel Lopez depicted which are the drivers that have been identified for the adoption of EGNOS
by the maritime community:
-
The system performance needs to be evaluated against user’s requirements, in terms of
coverage, accuracy, integrity, availability and continuity
-
Socio-economic aspects need to be assessed: different Cost Benefit Analysis of different
applications / services will be developed for this purpose.
-
How operational information will be communicated to mariners needs to be determined
-
The standardisation of shipborne receivers: The Multisystem Performance Standards for
Shipborne Receivers, including SBAS, was finalised at IMO NCSR 2. The IEC performance
requirements and tests specifications are the next step.
-
Other regulatory aspects to be considered include the recognition of EGNOS as part of
WWRNS and the definition of liability framework for the EGNOS service provision
Next, Manuel Lopez focused on the different possibilities for the use of EGNOS corrections via
existing maritime infrastructure. Two options were analysed:
-
Application 1: Transmission of EGNOS correction via IALA radiobeacons
 Broadcast EGNOS corrections – according to RTCM v2.3
 No impact on final users
 Similar performance to current IALA beacons. Possible local integrity check.
 Only IALA guidelines needed for common implementation.
 No need of EGNOS recognition by IMO for this application.
 Fast implementation.
-
Application 2: Transmission of EGNOS corrections via AIS stations
 Broadcast EGNOS corrections – according to RTCM v2.3. Implementation also in the
new channels for applications in VDES.
 Similar advantages than in Application 1, providing a complement to the IALA beacons.
 Under study:
(1) Analysis of bandwidth required to avoid saturating the channels. This application
may be used in areas with low-medium density of vessels.
(2) Communication/link between the main GNSS receiver, the ECDIS and the
AIS/VDES device – transmission of the differential corrections to the main GNSS
receiver to be used for navigation in case IALA DGPS corrections are not available.
For these applications the EGNOS correction could be obtained either from the SiS (in RTCA
format converted then to RTCM format) or from EDAS (SISNET or NTRIP Service).
In order to address the feasibility of these two options, the GSA has launched two calls for interest
for two potential pilot projects devoted to analyse the dissemination of EGNOS data via other
means different from GEO satellites.
1. Call for interest to enable the dissemination of EGNOS data via IALA beacons.
Pilot Project for dissemination of EGNOS data via IALA beacons with interested
Maritime/River Authorities => compare performance of service using EDAS (e.g.SISNeT,
Ntrip) and Signal-in-Space
2. Call for interest to enable the dissemination of EGNOS data via AIS/VDES.
Pilot Project for dissemination of EGNOS data via AIS with interested Maritime
Authorities/End Users => compare performance of service using EDAS (e.g.SISNeT, Ntrip)
and Signal-in-Space.
The GSA asked for the attendees feedback on the slides presented so far.
The questions and concerns expressed regarding the use of EGNOS for maritime navigation and, in
particular, the transmission of EGNOS corrections over the existing infrastructure, are listed below:
-
What happens when a complete failure of the EGNOS system happens? What if there is an
intentional interference and you have an erroneous position or not signal at all? In that cases
a second source for positioning would be necessary.
-
It is important to differentiate safety and security issues when addressing the use of EGNOS
for maritime navigation. Jamming and other intentional actions need to be addressed in
another way. In this regard, it is noted that jamming attacks do not impact the integrity but
the availability of the system (the receiver will not be able to compute the navigation
solution). It was also mentioned that the advantage of EGNOS with respect to DGNSS is
that for DGNSS, if you jam the reference stations you affect all the users connected to that
station. However, for the case of EGNOS, you would need to jam each user to obtain the
same impact.
-
The maritime requirements need to be properly addressed in order to know how to make
EGNOS compliant with them and to properly tune the receivers.
-
The two applications of EGNOS using the existing infrastructure involve the current version
of the system, EGNOS v2.
The attendees commented that they agreed with the short term solutions presented to this
point of the workshop. However they showed their high interest in seeing a complete
roadmap to see what the future will bring, what these short options will lead to in the future.
-
Performance based navigation: different attendees commented that the solutions presented
seem to improve only the availability (EGNOS seen as a backup of IALA DGNSS), but not
the accuracy, as EGNOS seems to provide an accuracy similar to DGPS. Besides, DPGS
may provide even better accuracy in locations close to the base stations.
However, the added value provided by the use of EGNOS is in fact integrity. As commented
by Ana Cezón (GMV), the system and receiver algorithms can be modified, the accuracy
can be improved, but the key point is the integrity that the EGNOS system can provide to
maritime navigation. The pilot projects like the GSA proposal are needed in order to have a
clear picture of the actual scenarios and of what can be actually achieved.
Nathalie Ricard continued with the last part of the presentation, showing the Maritime service
delivery to end user with EGNOS SiS. She presented two possibilities for the use of EGNOS
Signal-in-Space:
1. Mid-term solution: Use the EGNOS Signal-in-Space as it is, which will require:

To upgrade the existing receivers
o Follow guidelines to ensure homogenous characteristics of manufacturers’
existing products.
o Increase performance by adding system-level integrity & alarm mechanism
(and user-level integrity if needed).

In the future, new multisystem shipborne receivers (IMO on-going work)
2. Long-term solution (if needed): Create a specific ‘maritime message’ in the EGNOS SiS,
which will require:

To change the EGNOS system infrastructure itself

To change/upgrade of user receivers
Nathalie Ricard also presented the open points already identified which have to be solved in order
to implement the solutions listed above.
-
At user receiver level
o There is no standard for receivers today: under what conditions would users accept
to equip and/or retrofit to get the added value of integrity information?
o How long will it take to certify multisystem shipborne receivers (Wheelmark)?
-
At EGNOS system level
o Do we need to ensure coverage beyond the footprint of the EGNOS GEO satellite
(Arctic)? If so, how? (i.e. how is the additional infrastructure financed?)
o Developing a maritime message sent within the SiS would require to modify the
EGNOS system itself and also to adjust the SBAS standards (ICD, SARPs). Due to
its complexity this is a long-term approach (ie. EGNOS V3)
-
EGNOS Service provision framework: What would be the EGNOS Service Provision role
(ESSP)? What would be the link between ESSP and the maritime authorities/service
providers?
-
The qualification & certification processes for maritime safety need to be properly
understood.
The different points and open questions presented lead to an interactive session to know the
attendees impression and feedback.
2.4 Interactive session on open points to design EGNOS maritime services and
adoption roadmap
-
GEO satellites – what about using non-GEO satellites? Is technical feasible (the algorithms
and the capability are there)? who pays for it?
-
Regarding the certification of the system:
o Same kind of approach as with other systems
o The performance levels have to be well-known.
o Perhaps there is a need to certificate GNSS in combination with other
systems/sensors to guarantee the operation (inertial systems and so on)
-
Regarding the integrity:
o Integrity can be provided. The user needs/requirements have to be understood: under
which conditions this user needs the integrity and the type of integrity.
-
Regarding performance:
o For short term solutions the performance will not be improved (in 3 years or so) –
the maritime user will have to do with EGNOS v2 because v3 will not be ready
-
The costs for the user is a key point, they have to be conscious of the cost (e.g. costs of
updating receivers). It was highlighted need to talk to manufacturers in order to understand
the drivers for the users to equip the vessels.
-
Regarding the next version of the system, EGNOS V3, to be deployed by 2020:
o The requirements to be considered within the definition of EGNOS v3 need to be
fixed by 2016.
o But this does not mean that future requirements will not be included, as it could be
done in different system releases.
o The first release of EGNOS v3 may accept minor changes (it is possible to expand
it). However, the sooner the requirements are known, the better.
-
Some of the attendees seem to have the feeling that the corrections obtained with EGNOS
may be poorer than the corrections obtained with other differential systems. However, The
French Authority mentioned that some tests were performed in France showing that the
performances obtained with EGNOS were in the same order as DGNSS. Fiammetta Diani
also stated that several tests were done in different locations in Europe showing that EGNOS
offers similar accuracy performances as DGPS.
-
The EGNOS system may offer similar performance to DGPS, but the potential of EGNOS
was remarked:
o Integrity is the key issue
o Reduced costs: It is possible to have a central facility which computes the
corrections for several reference AIS/IALA beacon stations
o One advantage of EGNOS vs DGPS is the ability to predict if the signal will be
available at one time at one location and inform the user.
-
In certain points/ports RTK is used - in every port they have different solutions
-
The cost benefit analysis is another important point which could foster the use of EGNOS in
the maritime domain. The French Authority has made performance analysis and they know
DGPS and EGNOS offer similar performances. They are interested in the cost-efficient
solutions that EGNOS can bring.
-
It is important to have a clear picture of the user needs
-
The security issues need to be considered (jamming)
-
Regarding Inland navigation: The proposed solutions for the transmission of the EGNOS
corrections through the base stations seem to be interesting for inland navigation. The
accuracy provided by EGNOS is not a big issue as it seems to be sufficient for this type of
navigation. The question is: is the signal reliable? Integrity is the key issue. As explained by
the representative from Netherlands, Ivo ten Broeke, they are still analysing if EGNOS
could be useful for inland navigation.
As it can be seen, many questions and points arose during the interactive session. Many of them
could not be answered during the workshop, so the GSA offered to prepare a questionnaire to be
sent to the attendees in order to obtain feedback and further explanations. In addition the
GSA will also prepare a tentative roadmap that will be also provided to the attendees.
2.5 Topics for the next meeting
The GSA proposed the following topics for the next EGNOS workshops:
-
Define the qualification process for a maritime safety service
Define the certification process for a maritime safety service and/or service provider, incl.
scope of an EGNOS Working Agreement
The main objective of next meetings is to determine a realistic roadmap for adoption of new
EGNOS services integrating all pre-requisites for a safety service (standardisation of receivers,
certification aspects, regulatory framework, etc.).
2.5.1 Proposed dates for next meeting(s)
The following tentative dates for the next meeting(s) were proposed:
-
End of June 2015
October 2015
3
PARTICIPANTS
The detailed attendee list is included in the table below:
Name
Company
e-mail
Alexandre Allien
FDC (France Développement Conseil)
alexandre.allien@fdc.fr
Ana Cezón
GMV
ancm@gmv.com
Axelle Pomies
Galileo Services
axelle.pomies@galileoservices.org
Carlos Alvarez
INDRA
caquiroga@indra.es
Christophe Reux
IMPA representative
christophe.reux@ffpm.fr
MEDDE (Ministère de l'écologie, du
développement durable et de l'énergie)
European Satellite Services Provider
(ESSP)
david.comby@developpementdurable.gouv.fr
Enrique Tortosa
Puertos del Estado
etortosa@puertos.es
Fiametta Diani
European GNSS Agency (GSA)
Fiametta.Diani@gsa.europa.eu
Franco Gottifredi
European GNSS Agency (GSA)
Franco.Gottifredi@gsa.europa.eu
David Combi
Elisabet Lacarra
George Saw
Ivo ten Broeke
General Lighthouse Authorities, UK &
Ireland (GLA)
Ministry of Infrastructure and the
Environment
elisabet.lacarra@essp-sas.eu
george.shaw@gla-rrnav.org
ivo.ten.broeke@rws.nl
Jac Spaans
Dutch Institute of Navigation (NIN)
navicons@xs4all.nl
Jorge Moran
European Satellite Services Provider
(ESSP)
jorge.moran@essp-sas.eu
Laura Perea
INDRA
lperea@indra.es
Manuel Lopez
European GNSS Agency (GSA)
Manuel.LOPEZMARTINEZ@gsa.
europa.eu
Marc Revol
Thales Avionics
Marc.revol@fr.thalesgroup.com
Marcos López
GMV
malopez@gmv.com
María Mota
European Satellite Services Provider
(ESSP)
maria.mota@external.essp-sas.eu
Martin Bransby
General Lighthouse Authorities, UK &
Ireland
Martin.Bransby@gla-rrnav.org
Nathalie Ricard
European GNSS Agency (GSA)
Nathalie.Ricard@gsa.europa.eu
Pierre Yves Martin
CEREMA
pierre-yves.martin@cerema.fr
Roger Barker
Trinity House, London
roger.barker@thls.org
Silvia Porfili
European GNSS Agency (GSA)
Silvia.porfili@gsa.europa.eu
Stig Erik
Christiansen
Kongsberg Seatex
stigerik.christiansen@kongsberg.com
Vincent Bruger
MEDDE (Ministère de l'écologie, du
développement durable et de l'énergie)
/DGITM/DAM
Vincent.Bruger@developpementdurable.gouv.fr
Table 1
EGNOS Workshop Attendees
4
CONCLUSIONS
This section of the document presents the main impressions and outcomes of this First Workshop
on the Maritime use of EGNOS:
-
The attendees clarified that according to the IMO eNavigation concept the primary goal is to
achieve a Resilient PNT with at least two different/independent sources for positioning.
-
The maritime community seems to focus on GNSS vulnerabilities (interferences). The added
value that EGNOS can provide to the maritime community (availability, integrity) should
also address such inherent GNSS vulnerabilities.
-
Some of the attendees were very interested to know the roadmap for the proposed solutions
based on EGNOS SiS.
-
The cost for the final users is a key point that needs to be addressed (with manufacturers and
ship owners).
It is very important to continue this work in close collaboration with the maritime community. The
objective is to continue finding answers to the open questions and issues during the coming
workshops, in order to understand the mariners’ real needs and find the best way to introduce
EGNOS for maritime navigation.
5
ACRONYMS
Acronym
Definition
AIS
Automatic Information System
DSC
Digital Selective Calling
ECDIS
Electronic Chart Display & Information System
EDAS
EGNOS Data Access Service
EMRF
European Maritime Radionavigation Forum
ENC
European Navigation Conference
ESSP
European Satellite Services Provider
GLA
General Lighthouse Authorities of the United Kingdom and Ireland
GMDSS
Global Maritime Distress Safety System
GSA
The European GNSS Agency
IMO
International Maritime Organisation
IMPA
International Maritime Pilots Association
MSC
IMO Maritime Safety Committee
PNT
Position, Navigation and Timing
SoL
Safety of Life Service
6
ANNEX A: WORKSHOP INTRODUCTORY NOTE AND AGENDA
END OF THE DOCUMENT