1

REMOTE TOWERS – UK CAA PERSPECTIVE

Executive Digital Tower Symposium 28-29 November 2018

Dave Drake UK CAA

2

Conventional towers – a thing of the

past?

They’ve been here a long time

They’ll be with us for a time to come

They’re not cheap:

Kuala Lumpur International Airport's West

Tower 439 ft (133.8 m) - biggest in the world –

build cost = €16 million

But are their day’s numbered?

3

The alternative?

Remote tower technology appears to offer a

cost-effective option in certain circumstances

In service in Sweden

SESAR JU trials

Implementation projects in China, France,

Germany, Norway, UK, USA

Under consideration in Australia, Brazil,

Thailand

BUT WHAT DO WE MEAN?

4

‘Remote’, ‘virtual’ or ‘digital’?

Remote tower:

ICAO:

‘remote tower’ in PANS-ATM Amendment 8 but not defined.

EASA ED Decision 2015/014/R:

‘Aerodrome remote tower’ means a facility from which ATS can

be provided to aerodrome traffic through real-time visual

presentation of the elements contained in its area of

responsibility (manoeuvring area and vicinity of the aerodrome)

together with other elements that support the operation.

5

‘Remote’, ‘virtual’ or ‘digital’?

Remote tower:

EUROCAE ED240 MINIMUM AVIATION SYSTEM

PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATION FOR REMOTE

TOWER OPTICAL SYSTEMS:

Remote Tower Module (RTM) - A module from which Remote

ATS can be provided. It includes one or more controller working

positions (CWPs) (including necessary ATS systems such as

communications, aerodrome lighting control etc.) and visual

presentation display screens, as required.

Remote Tower Centre (RTC) - A facility containing one or more

RTMs from which ATS can be provided to one or more

aerodromes.

6

‘Remote’, ‘virtual’ or ‘digital’?

EUROCAE ED240:

Virtual Presentation

A computer-generated synthetic visual representation of the

aerodrome operational environment generated using target

information derived from surveillance systems (e.g.

multilateration, ADS-B, approach radar), static environment

information (e.g. aerodrome layout, GIS data) and other sensor

information (e.g. meteorological data). The virtual presentation

may contain two-dimensional, three-dimensional, pictorial,

symbolic or textual representations.

NOTE: This definition includes two-dimensional plan-position

indicator type displays as well as three-dimensional virtual

environments.

7

‘Remote’, ‘virtual’ or ‘digital’?

EUROCAE ED240:

Augmented Presentation

A mixture of virtual presentation and optical sensor

presentation, whereby information associated with real-world

objects is presented as 2D/3D graphical elements, image data,

symbols or text overlaid onto the optical sensor presentation,

either conformably or close to their optical images. Examples

include runway/taxiway boundaries and stop bars, and target

symbols and labels.

8

‘Remote’, ‘virtual’ or ‘digital’?

But what does ‘digital’ tower mean?

Will use ‘remote’ throughout the presentation

9

Regulatory oversight challenges

System considerations

Image fidelity

Image frame rate

Audio facilities

System interdependencies and reliability assurance

requirements

Need to mandate surface movement radar?

Cybersecurity.

10

Regulatory oversight challenges

Physical considerations:

Camera tower frangibility.

Camera tower security.

Camera tower safeguarding.

Camera tower intrusion into obstacle planes.

Camera resilience - snow; ice; birds; age;

replacement/maintenance (including cleaning)

schedule(s).

Signal light and pyrotechnic signal provision

11

Regulatory oversight challenges

Operational considerations:

Failure modes and mitigation of system failure(s) –

deployment to contingency facilities, control of traffic at

the time of failure, etc.)

Transition to LVPs

12

‘Technology is only half the delivery’

Social considerations

Potential loss of high earners in remote locations,

unwanted/unwelcome move of ATS personnel.

Of concern to labour organisations

For ATS providers to resolve

Not in scope of this presentation

13

‘Technology is only half the delivery’

Human factors:

Image frame rate - consideration of the medical/HF

impact of low frame rates.

Provision of remote ancillary services

(especially Met).

Control of grass cutting/snow clearance/general

aerodrome work in progress?

Control of emergency services?

ATS personnel ongoing familiarity with served

aerodrome(s).

14

‘Technology is only half the delivery’

AIP text references to remote tower service

provision?

AIP charting (AD2 aerodrome charts)?

Location of camera(s)?

Location of light signals?

15

‘Technology is only half the delivery’

Contestability

16

UK next steps

Deliver initial policy statement (delayed but plan

to publish ASAP)

Develop content to reflect equipage states and

multiple operations (2019)

Ensure alignment with EASA output

17

The EASA angle

So far:

EDD 2015/014/R: ‘GM on the implementation of the

RT concept for single mode of operation’

EDD 2015/015/R: AMC & GM to Reg. (EU)

2015/340‘Requirements on ATCO Licensing regarding

remote tower operations’

NPA 2017-21:

Guidelines on ‘Remote Aerodrome Air Traffic

Services (ATS)’

GM* & AMC** to the ATCO training and licensing

Regulation (2015/340)

18

The EASA angle

Still to come:

Outcomes of NPA 2017-21

Expected publication of the expanded EASA material/revised

ED Decision(s): Q1 2019

Replace existing Single Remote Tower GM.

Extended in scope, covering more complex mode of operations

(e.g. ‘busier/larger airports’, ‘multiple mode of operation’ and

‘contingency solutions’) plus use of new technical enablers.

Enhanced/improved,takingintoconsiderationgainedoperationale

xperiencesandnewR&Dresults.

Updated set of AMC/GM to the ATCO training and licensing

Regulation (2015/340), including refined and scope to cover

also e.g. multiple mode of operation.

19

The EASA angle

Still to come:

A forum to be created under the existing EASA

advisory bodies (ATM/ANS TeB & ATM/ANS TeC)

with a view to exchange best practices for remote

tower implementation and oversight.

Possibilities for EASA to provide support to

competent authorities and ATS providers, regarding

implementation projects

20

EUROCAE ED240

Beyond ED 240 ‘Minimum Aviation System

Performance Specification (MASPS) for

Remote Tower Optical Systems’:

EUROCAE developing ED-240A to address, inter alia,

remote tower optical target tracking technologies.

Expected publication was end 2018/early 2019, no

current news

Expected that EASA will consider it the appropriate

technical reference.

21

The ICAO angle

Global Air Navigation Plan (Doc 9750)

Appendix 2 Aviation System Block Upgrades B1-RATS

Remotely Operated Aerodrome Control.

PANS-ATM Amendment 8

Just a beginning.

Air Navigation Conference 13 (9-19 October

2018)

Papers from China, India, CANSO/IFATCA/IFATSEA, ITF

for more to be done to develop appropriate SARPS and

PANS

22

The ICAO angle

Air Navigation Conference 13

the variety of operational requirements made it challenging

to ensure a harmonized approach to all implementations of

remote tower operations.

the importance of striking the right balance between a

specification-based and a performance-based approach to

ensure that innovation would not be stifled.

industry standards and guidance should be used where

possible

working papers referred to the relevant ICAO technical

expert group to continue the development of provisions and

guidance material, as necessary.

23

The ICAO angle

More from ICAO can be expected:

ICAO continue to monitor the progress implementation of

remote towers in the context of the existing work

programme.

Consideration of a dedicated public access web-hosted

‘library’ of national provisions relating to the approval of

remote tower facilities pending the development of

definitive ICAO requirements,akin to the ICAO UAS Toolkit

(https://www.icao.int/safety/UA/UASToolkit/Pages/default.as

px).

Amend Doc 9426 ATS Planning Manual to reflect

emergence and application of remote towers.

24

The future

Remote towers represent an opportunity

Regulators avoid stifling innovation and

evolution

But remote towers may not be a panacea

All stakeholders need to work together to

enable implementation that is:

Globally as consistent as possible

Safe

25

Questions