Dominic de HAYES 1

1
Preparation for the World Radio Conference
2003(WRC-03)

• Radio Navigation Satellite Service
• (RNSS)

2
Background

• WRC-2000 allocated 5 additional bands for RNSS
  systems
• Downlink
• 1164-1215 MHz,
• 1260-1300 MHz
• 5010-5030 MHz
• Uplink
• 1300-1350 MHz
• 5000-5010 MHz
• Provisional power limits were set for RNSS
  systems in the bands 1164-1215 MHz and 5010-5030
  MHz
• To provide clear protection to Aeronautical Radio
  Navigation Service (ARNS) and Radioastronomy
  systems.

3
Agenda Item 1.15

• Resolution 604
• Compatibility studies between the RNSS (space to
  Earth) in 5010-5030 MHz and the radioastronomy
  service.
• Resolution 605
• Use of frequency band 1164-1215 MHz by systems of
  the RNSS (space to Earth).
• Resolution 606
• Use of frequency band 1215-1300 MHz by systems of
  the RNSS (space to Earth).

4
Resolution 604 protection of the
radioastronomy service below 5GHz
5
Resolution 604

• Recommendation ITU-R M.1583 has been developed to
  assess the unwanted emission levels (in the band
  4990 - 5000 MHz) from non-GSO RNSS systems at
  radioastronomy sites. Can be used in
  interference calculations
• CPM text
• Proposes a pfd limit for GSO systems (-171
  dBW/m2/10MHz)
• Proposes epfd limit for NGSO systems (-245
  dBW/m2/10MHz) for no more than 2 of time at RAS
  sites
• Minimum observation angle of 5º assumed unless
  RAS site published notification data specifies
  otherwise
• Not contentious. Most nations agree on the
  proposals

6
Resolution 605 Band 1164-1215MHz
7
Resolution 605

• Draft new recommendations developed to determine
  the impact of the RNSS (space-to-Earth) on the
  ARNS (DME/TACAN) in the band 1164-1215 MHz.
• M.RNSS1 Aggregate limit needed to protect ARNS
• Methodology to derive the aggregate epfd limit
• Aggregate epfd limit 121.5 dBW/m2/MHz
• M.RNSS2 Methodologies to calculate RNSS
  system(s) epfd.
• Methodology can be used during co-ordination
  process between RNSS operators

8
Resolution 605 CPM text

• A single Method is now proposed An aggregate
  epfd limit.
• Originally an ICAO and CEPT proposal, now agreed
  by USA, Canada and others
• Fixed epfd limit to guarantee protection for ARNS
• Co-ordination between all RNSS systems including,
  non-GSO to prevent inter-system interference
• RNSS shall not claim protection from ARNS
• Regular consultation meetings to prevent
  inter-service interference
• Other Methods previously considered include
• No limit and limits per RNSS system
• From seven methods to one!

9
Resolution 605 CPM text

• Unresolved issues
• How to share the spectrum resource between
  systems?
• slicing the epfd cake, not dependant on filing
  date!
• Which systems to include in consultation process?
• US and Canada support milestones
• CEPT decide within consultation process
• How to achieve fair access?
• CEPT proposes per satellite pfd limits in
  addition to aggregate epfd limit (based on
  guesstimated total number of satellites)
• US and Canada prefer discussion within the
  consultation process
• Need for transitional measures between 2000 and
  2003?
• US no - CEPT and Canada yes

10
Resolution 605 CEPT Proposals

• Aggregate epfd limit of -121.5dBW/m2/MHz
• Co-ordination between RNSS systems
• Consultation between RNSS systems
• Per satellite pfd limits to prevent spectrum
  hogging by a single system.
• -118dBW/m2/51MHz
• -129dBW/m2/MHz
• Publication of RNSS system characteristics used
  in epfd calculations
• Transitional measures for 2000 - 2003 filings
• Proposal to extend co-ordination to all RNSS
  bands (not fully agreed within CEPT)

11
Resolution 606 Band 1215-1300MHz
12
Resolution 606

• Is a RNSS satellite pfd limit required to protect
  the existing radiolocation and radionavigation
  (radar) services?
• Without restricting existing RNSS system
  operations?
• Studies carried out, simulation and experimental
• No single pfd value was identified to guarantee
  protection for radars without restricting
  existing RNSS operations

13
Resolution 606 CPM text

• Method A1 No limit (current situation in the
  Radio Regulations)
• US and Russian proposal (no constraint on GPS and
  GLONASS)
• Method A2 No limit and operate on
  non-interference basis
• CEPT proposal (no constraint on current GPS and
  GLONASS)
• Method B limit based on current situation
  (Current GPS and GLONASS emissions)
• US stated that future GPS will emit higher signal
  powers.
• Method C Band segmentation (limit in some part
  of the band)
• Russian proposal
• ICAO is not against this method
• Galileo would have different constraints to
  current RNSS systems

14
Resolution 606 CEPT Proposals

• CEPT have converged to a single method
• Method A2 - No limit and operate on
  non-interference basis
• No pfd limit to be imposed (no constraint on GPS
  and GLONASS)
• non-interference to radiolocation and
  radionavigation protects in-band radar
  operations.
• Co-ordination between all RNSS systems
• Note At CPM there was significant support
  for convergence to Method A2. But not all
  nations agreed

15
Conclusion

• Resolution 604 (radioastronomy protection)
• Protection criteria agreed
• Resolution is uncontentious
• Resolution 605 (ARNS protection)
• Protection criteria agreed
• Regular consultation meetings between operators
  to share the the epfd cake between real systems
• Definition of real system undefined
• Concern that milestones may prevail
• Resolution 606 (radar protection)
• Method A2 no pfd likely to be the most
  appropriate regulatory measure

16
Merci, Gracias, Danke, Dank u, Grazie, Obrigado,
Kiitos, Tak, Euxaristw, Spasiba, Dziekuje,
Dêkuji, Köszönöm Thank you!Dominic.Hayes_at_ra.gs
i.gov.ukUK Radiocommunications Agency