PDF Development of Navigation Technology For Flight Safety Baburov S V Ebook Full Chapter

Development of Navigation Technology
for Flight Safety Baburov S.V.

Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/development-of-navigation-technology-for-flight-safet
y-baburov-s-v/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...
Development and Testing of Navigation Algorithms for

Autonomous Underwater Vehicles Francesco Fanelli
https://textbookfull.com/product/development-and-testing-of-
navigation-algorithms-for-autonomous-underwater-vehicles-
francesco-fanelli/
Embedded Software Development for Safety-Critical

Systems 2nd Edition Chris Hobbs
https://textbookfull.com/product/embedded-software-development-
for-safety-critical-systems-2nd-edition-chris-hobbs/
Embedded Software Development for Safety-Critical

Systems, Second Edition Chris Hobbs (Author)
https://textbookfull.com/product/embedded-software-development-
for-safety-critical-systems-second-edition-chris-hobbs-author/
Flight Mechanics Theory of Flight Paths 1st Edition

Angelo Miele
https://textbookfull.com/product/flight-mechanics-theory-of-
flight-paths-1st-edition-angelo-miele/
Time of Flight and Structured Light Depth Cameras
Technology and Applications 1st Edition Pietro
Zanuttigh
https://textbookfull.com/product/time-of-flight-and-structured-
light-depth-cameras-technology-and-applications-1st-edition-
pietro-zanuttigh/
Spatial Information Technology for Sustainable

Development Goals Dilip Kumar
https://textbookfull.com/product/spatial-information-technology-
for-sustainable-development-goals-dilip-kumar/
Information and Communication Technology for

Sustainable Development Proceedings of ICT4SD 2018
Milan Tuba
https://textbookfull.com/product/information-and-communication-
technology-for-sustainable-development-proceedings-of-
ict4sd-2018-milan-tuba/
Technology Development Multidimensional Review for

Engineering and Technology Managers 1st Edition Tugrul
U. Daim
https://textbookfull.com/product/technology-development-
multidimensional-review-for-engineering-and-technology-
managers-1st-edition-tugrul-u-daim/
Advanced Flight Dynamics with Elements of Flight

Control 1st Edition Nandan K. Sinha
https://textbookfull.com/product/advanced-flight-dynamics-with-
elements-of-flight-control-1st-edition-nandan-k-sinha/
Springer Aerospace Technology
Baburov S.V.
Bestugin A.R.
Galyamov A.M.
Sauta O.I.
Shatrakov Y.G.
Development
of Navigation
Technology for
Flight Safety
The Springer Aerospace Technology series is devoted to the technology of aircraft
and spacecraft including design, construction, control and the science. The books
present the fundamentals and applications in all fields related to aerospace
engineering. The topics include aircraft, missiles, space vehicles, aircraft engines,
propulsion units and related subjects.
More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/8613

Baburov S.V. Bestugin A.R.
• •
Galyamov A.M. Sauta O.I.

• •
Shatrakov Y.G.
Development of Navigation
Technology for Flight Safety
123
Baburov S.V. Bestugin A.R.
Saint-Petersburg, Russia Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Galyamov A.M. Sauta O.I.

Moscow, Russia Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Shatrakov Y.G.
Saint-Petersburg, Russia
ISSN 1869-1730 ISSN 1869-1749 (electronic)

ISBN 978-981-13-8374-8 ISBN 978-981-13-8375-5 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-8375-5
© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part
of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission
or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar
methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from
the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the
authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained
herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard
to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721,
Singapore
Introduction
The statistics of the world aviation accidents shows [1–6] that, despite significant
efforts made by aviation equipment and avionics manufacturers to ensure flight
safety (FS), a significant reduction in the number of accidents and incidents cannot
be achieved. The material damage caused by aviation accidents around the world
including those involving military aircraft (AC) amounts to tens of billions of
dollars, and the non-pecuniary damage in civil aviation is extremely difficult to
assess in general. That is why the issues of ensuring the AC flight safety are always
the primary focus of the AC developers.
Guidance documents of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO),
the European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation (Eurocontrol), the
Interstate Aviation Committee (IAC), the American Association of State Avionics
Producers (RTCA), as well as the Operational Requirements (ORs) of various
Russian forced to weapons means and systems determine the need to develop both
special flight safety support systems and to improve the technical characteristics
of the navigation systems used (including the GNSS) to improve the efficiency of
AC use [7–9].
It is known [1–3] that the greatest number of accidents in aviation has occurred
and still occurs at the landing phase during when aircraft collide with ground or
artificial obstacles in reduced visibility conditions.
To improve the AC flight safety, in the 50s of the twentieth century, the
development of meter-wave instrument landing systems has begun, now known as
instrument landing systems (ILSs); and to prevent AC collisions with ground,
hazardous descent warning systems appeared in the 1960s, such as Ground
Proximity Warning System (GPWSs) in the USA and Hazardous Descent Warning
Systems (HDWSs) in the USSR.
The development and implementation of instrument landing systems and colli-
sion avoidance systems made it possible to reduce the number of AC accidents;
and, if not for the annual growth of the AC fleet and aerodrome network, the
increase in the flying time and aging of the aviation fleet as a whole, the number of
accidents and incidents would have been reduced by now to a large extent.
Unfortunately, after a certain decrease in the total number of accidents resulting
v
vi Introduction
from the introduction of new systems, their growth has usually been observed,
which is also true at present. Thus, a qualitative improvement in the situation with
regard to reducing the accident rate still has not been achieved.
The need to improve the efficiency of the use of weapons and military equipment
led to the development of the new generation of medium-altitude GNSSs
(GLONASS and GPS) in the late 1970s by the military departments of the USSR
and the USA, which provided ACs with accurate navigation information at any time
in all regions of the world [10]. The high efficiency of GNSS applications in the
military areas has also fueled the widespread introduction of GNSSs for civil
applications since the 90s of the twentieth century. In the USA and Europe,
Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning Systems (TAWS) [11] using GNSS infor-
mation have been developed and introduced, and in the late 1990s, similar EGPWS
systems appeared in Russia [12, 13]. At the beginning of the twenty-first century,
instrumental landing systems appeared that used GNSS technologies: first in the
USA, based on GPS [14, 15], and then in Russia, already using GLONASS and
GPS [16–18].
The emergence of medium-altitude GNSSs (GLONASS, GPS) and the begin-
ning of their practical use in military areas and in civil aviation resulted in a
situation that ICAO is currently considering GNSS as the primary means of nav-
igation at all phases of civil AC flights [18, 19].
The wide application of GNSSs is due to a number of both technical and
economic factors. Their combination provides certain advantages of GNSSs in
comparison with other radionavigation systems. Although GNSSs have some
fundamental drawbacks, its wide practical use is explained by the fact that the
elimination of these drawbacks for specific applications is possible in some inex-
pensive but effective manner.
A feature of the new systems for improving the AC flight safety, such as
EGPWSs and GNSS-based landing systems (the international designation GLS—
Global Landing System) are fundamentally new capabilities inherent in the GNSS
system, which lead to a qualitative change in the approach to reducing the rate of
aviation accidents and incidents.
Summarizing the above, one can conclude that one of the most important
directions in the development of GNSS technologies is the integrated use of various
systems that previously have not interacted, based on the GNSS principles.
The analysis of current trends in FS-related systems shows that despite the efforts
being made, a contradiction has arisen and is growing today, which is the incon-
sistency between the constantly growing requirements for flight safety and
the capabilities of existing radiotechnical systems for landing and collision avoid-
ance. For example, the instrument radiobeacon landing system will not be able to
prevent an AC from colliding with ground or an artificial obstacle at the aerodrome
with a complex nature of the surrounding terrain. The limitations of the known
approaches used in instrument landing systems and collision avoidance systems
make it necessary to develop new methods, techniques and devices that allow both to
increase the efficiency of each of these systems and to gain additional advantages in
the development of GNSS technologies through the integrated use of these systems.
Introduction vii
Thus, it is topical to develop and scientifically substantiate new methodological

approaches and technical solutions that enable compliance with modern and future
requirements to AC flight safety.
The results presented in the monograph made it possible to develop a new
methodological approach to solving the problems of increasing the AC flight safety
both by using GNSS technologies separately in collision avoidance systems (CASs)
and in satellite-based landing systems (SLSs), and by applying new methods in
integrated use of CASs and SLSs.
The use of the proposed approaches makes it possible to create and develop a
new class of integrated systems, which provide for a substantial increase in military
and civil aviation AC FS and also increase the economic efficiency of civil aviation.
The monograph addresses radiotechnical systems for providing AC FS, which
use satellite technologies based on medium-altitude GNSSs, as well as method-
ological approaches and GNSS-based hardware–software complexes providing
practical implementation of the proposed approaches to FS increasing.
The purpose of this monograph is to systematically present new scientifically
substantiated methodological approaches and GNSS-based technical solutions that
allow reducing the probability of accidents during military and civil AC flights.
The problem under consideration is of a complex nature and encompasses a wide
range of scientific and technical directions. This includes a comprehensive analysis
of the state and identification of the main problems in the development and oper-
ation of instrument landing systems and CASs, approaches to the construction of
GNSS-based radiotechnical complexes, synthesis of structures for building SLSs
and CASs, and recommendations for the creation of multifunctional systems.
The monograph presents new methods for increasing the accuracy, integrity,
continuity, ergonomics, and availability of satellite-based landing systems and
collision avoidance systems, in which GNSS technologies are used, including the
conditions of electromagnetic interference. It also describes new methodical
approaches to the design of SLS and CAS structures and new methods to improve
flight safety based on the integrated use of these systems. The peculiarity of all the
developed methods and structures for constructing radiotechnical complexes is the
their applicability in other areas of science and technology related to highly accurate
determination of the state parameters for the controlled object (road, sea, and river
transport, military navigation systems of all branches of Armed Forces). Practically
all the developed methods can be used where GNSS technologies are used and
where it is necessary to provide high requirements to the accuracy, integrity, and
continuity of navigation information.
The practical value of the monograph is that, based on the approaches described
in it, it is possible to systematize and simplify the procedure for making decisions
and to reduce the influence of subjective factors in selecting the main functional
elements of navigation systems, including those using expert navigation-oriented
systems with a wide range of preference criteria for multiple factor analysis. The
use of the approaches proposed in the monograph makes it possible to significantly
shorten the time frame for the development of new flight safety systems that use the
existing structures of onboard navigation and flight systems on various AC types to
the fullest extent.
viii Introduction
Chapter 1 analyzes the existing landing systems and collision avoidance sys-
tems, their performances, and trends of their development. It briefly describes the
GNSS structure and functions and specifies the reasons for the use of augmentations
in satellite-based landing systems and collision avoidance systems. It also presents
requirements for the performance of satellite-based landing systems and collision
avoidance systems. Based on the analysis, prospective methods and means to
improve flight safety in satellite-based landing systems and collision avoidance
systems are considered. At the end of the chapter, safety performance indicators are
selected, and the problem under consideration is formalized.
Chapter 2 presents the methodology for constructing satellite-based landing
systems and collision avoidance systems; proposes an approach to selecting the
basic elements of the structures of these systems; considers the structure of the
satellite-based landing system based on GNSS augmentations, and the structure
of the collision avoidance system using GNSS technologies. At the end of the
chapter, directions and ways are presented that may be used to enhance the con-
sidered systems and to improve flight safety.
Chapter 3 presents methods to improve flight safety when using satellite-based
landing systems. It also considers the methods of constructing and using diagrams
of the volumetric distribution of radiowaves multipath propagation errors; the
method of ensuring the integrity and continuity of information during AC approach
and landing using the integrated signal-to-noise ratio for the measured pseudor-
anges; the method for compensating pseudorange errors in the SLS ground and
onboard subsystems based on phase measurements; and the method of using
pseudosatellites in satellite-based landing systems.
Chapter 4 presents methods for improving flight safety for collision avoidance
systems. It considers the method of collision avoidance based on the three-
dimensional synthesis of the cross sections of the underlying surface (ground) and
the mapping of hazardous elements; the method of estimating the possibility of
vertical maneuvering and determining the direction of the turn; the method for
determining the hazardous terrain relief, taking into account the possibility of AC
reverse; and the method of analyzing the space inside the corridor that is safe for the
flight.
Chapter 5 presents comprehensive technical solutions for the joint use of
satellite-based landing systems and collision avoidance systems based on GNSS
technologies. It defines the principles of building an integrated flight safety system
on the basis of satellite-based landing systems and collision avoidance systems. It
proposes a method for preventing AC landing on an unauthorized runway by
calculating a virtual glide path, and a method of reporting the AC position during
landing and landing roll. At the end of the chapter, the improvement of flight safety
with the use of integrated systems is assessed.
Chapter 6 provides recommendations on the application of the technical solu-
tions proposed in the paper in satellite-based landing systems and collision
avoidance systems and the principles of construction, and design features of
onboard equipment for improving the AC flight safety. Examples are given of the
construction of an onboard navigation and landing complex on the base of the
Introduction ix
satellite-based landing system and the collision avoidance system. The results of
flight tests and practical operation are presented. At the end of the chapter, an
integral assessment of flight safety improvement is made, and recommendations are
given on the practical application of the proposed technical solutions.
In conclusion, the main results are provided that were achieved in the process of
practical implementation of the methodological approaches, structures for the
construction of systems, methods, and devices to improve flight safety that are
presented in the monograph.
References
1. Annual report of the Council (2011) [Electronic resource]. International Civil Aviation
Organization. Doc 9975. www.icao.int
2. Aralov GD (2012) Analysis of flight safety issues. In: Flight safety issues, No. 5, 2012.
VNIITI, Moscow (in Russian)
3. Annual report of the Interstate Aviation Committee (IAC) “Flight Safety Status in 2011”
[Electronic resource], www.mak.ru (in Russian)
4. Materials of the 5-th international conference “Safety of the air transport system”. [Electronic
resource]. Moscow, 20 Feb 2012 (in Russian)
5. Guziy AG, Lushkin AM (2008) Quantitative estimation of the current level of aircraft
operator flight safety. In: Flight safety issues, No. 10, 2008. VNIITI, Moscow (in Russian)
6. Abstract of a study conducted by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) for 2009
(2010) In: Flight safety issues, No. 11, 2010. VNIITI, Moscow (in Russian)
7. Military doctrine of the Russian Federation for the period until 2020/Approved by the Decree
of the President of the Russian Federation of 5 Feb 2010, No. 146 “On the Military Doctrine
of the Russian Federation”. [Electronic resource]. http://stat.doc.mil.ru/documents (in
Russian)
8. Safety management manual (2006) Doc 9859, First edition [Electronic resource]. International
Civil Aviation Organization (in Russian)
9. Baburov VI, Rogova AA, Sobolev SP (2005) Method for calculating deviations from the
heading line and glide path in the onboard equipment of the satellite-based landing system.
NSTU Sci Bull 1:3–10 (in Russian)
10. Dmitriev PP et al (1993) Network satellite radio navigation systems. In: Shebshayevich VS
(resp ed) 2nd edn. Radio and Communication, Moscow, 408 p (in Russian)
11. Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS). ARINC 763, Recommendations dated 10
Dec 1999 (in Russian)
12. Certificate of the product conformance (2003) SGKI-034-112-SRPBZ. Interstate Aviation
Committee. Aviation register (in Russian)
13. Dryagin DM (2006) Complex enhanced ground proximity warning system with enhanced
functionality and software algorithms that minimize the false alarm probability [Electronic
resource]. Thesis and Tech Sciences: 05.11.03. RSL, Moscow (in Russian)
14. Akos D (2000) Development and testing of the Stanford LAAS ground facility prototype. In:
Akos D, Gleason S, Enge P, Luo M, Pervan B, Pullen S, Xie G, Yang J, Zhang J (eds) NTM
2000: Proceedings of 2000 national technical meeting of the institute of navigation. Anaheim,
pр 210–219
15. Braff R (2001) LAAS Performance for terminal area navigation. In: ION 57th Annual
meeting/CIGTF 20th Biennial guidance test symposium, Albuquerque, NM, pp 252–262, 11–
13 June 2001
x Introduction
16. Solovyev YuA (2003) Satellite navigation and its applications. Eco-Trends, Moscow, 326 p
(in Russian)
17. Yatsenkov VS (2005) Fundamentals of satellite navigation. NAVSTAR and GLONASS GPS
systems. Goryachaya liniya-Telecom, Moscow, p 272 (in Russian)
18. Local Area Augmentation System. Certificate of type No. 399 of 02.12.2005. Interstate
Aviation Committee. Aviation register (in Russian)
19. Annex 10 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation. Aeronautical
Telecommunications. Radio Navigation Aids, vol 1, 6th edn, July 2006 (in Russian)
Contents
1 General Description of Flight Safety Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1

1.1 Analysis of the State and Prospects for the Development
of Instrument Landing Systems and Collision Avoidance
Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1
1.1.1 Instrument Landing Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1
1.2 Features of Global Navigation Satellite Systems
as an Instrument Basis for Improving Flight Safety . . . . . . . . . .. 6
1.3 Augmentations—The Main Method to Improve the Performance
Characteristics of Global Navigation Satellite Systems . . . . . . . .. 16
1.4 Analysis of Requirements for Satellite-Based Landing Systems
and Collision Avoidance Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 20
1.5 General Methods and Techniques to Improve Flight Efficiency
and Safety When Using Satellite-Based Landing Systems
and Collision Avoidance Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
1.6 Flight Safety Indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
1.7 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
2 Methodology for Constructing Satellite-Based Landing Systems
and Collision Avoidance Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 43
2.1 Theoretical Background of a Formalized Methodological
Approach to the Selection of Basic Elements for Radioelectronic
Complexes to Improve Flight Efficiency and Safety . . . . . . . . . .. 45
2.2 Methods for Building the Structure of the Ground and Onboard
Radioelectronic Complexes of Satellite-Based Landing Systems
with Augmentations of Global Navigation Satellite Systems . . . .. 62
2.3 Methods and Rules for the Development of a Collision
Avoidance System with the Use of Global Navigation Satellite
System Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 67
xi
xii Contents
2.4 Directions and Methods to Enhance Satellite-Based Landing

Systems and Collision Avoidance Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
2.5 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
3 Methods for Improving Flight Efficiency and Safety
for Satellite-Based Landing Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 79
3.1 Method for Increasing the Accuracy and Integrity
of the Guidance Signals Based on the Construction and Use
of Volumetric Distribution Diagrams for Radio Waves Multipath
Errors and the System Structure for Its Implementation . . . . . . . .. 79
3.2 Method for Ensuring Integrity and Continuity of Guidance
Signals Based on the Use of an Integrated Signal-to-Noise Ratio
for Pseudoranges in the Presence of Radiointerference . . . . . . . .. 92
3.3 Method for Increasing Accuracy and Integrity of Guidance
Signals Based on Pseudorange Error Compensation Using Phase
Measurements and the Structure of the Radioelectronic Complex
for Its Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
3.4 Method for Increasing Accuracy, Integrity, Continuity, and
Availability of Guidance Signals Based on the Use of
Pseudosatellite Signals and the System Structure for Its
Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
3.5 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
4 Methods for Improving Flight Efficiency and Safety Based
on Technologies Applicable in Collision Avoidance Systems . . . . . . . 121
4.1 Method for Improving Flight Safety by Generating a Warning
About a Potential Collision Based on the Three-Dimensional
Synthesis of the Underlying Surface Sections and the Display
of Hazardous Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
4.2 Method for Increasing the Flight Effectiveness and Safety
by Assessing the Possibility of Vertical Maneuvering
and Determining the Direction of the Turn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
4.3 Method for Increasing the Flight Effectiveness and Safety
by Identifying Hazardous Terrain, Taking into Account
the Possibility of a Reverse Turn, and the System Structure
for Its Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
4.4 Method for Improving Flight Efficiency and Safety
by Analyzing the Space Inside a Corridor Safe for Flight . . . . . . . 150
4.5 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
Contents xiii
5 Integrated Technical Solutions on the Joint Use of Technologies

Applicable in Collision Avoidance Systems and Satellite-Based
Landing Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161
5.1 Principles of Constructing an Integrated Flight Safety
Enhancement System Based on the Collision Avoidance
System and the Satellite-Based Landing System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161
5.2 Method for Preventing Aircraft Landings on an Unauthorized
Runway by Calculating a Virtual Glide Path . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
5.3 Method for Notifying of the Aircraft or UAV Position
During the Landing and Roll-on Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
5.4 Assessment of Flight Safety and Efficiency Improvements
with the Use of Integrated Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194
5.5 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
6 Recommendations for the Application of the Proposed Technical
Solutions in the Satellite-Based Landing Systems and Collision
Avoidance Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
6.1 Principles of Construction and Design Features of Onboard
Equipment to Improve Flight Efficiency and Safety . . . . . . . . . . . 200
6.2 Construction of an Onboard Navigation and Landing Complex
on the Basis of the Satellite-Based Landing System
and the Collision Avoidance System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
6.3 Results of the Satellite-Based Landing System Flight Tests . . . . . . 210
6.4 Results of the Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning System
Flight Tests and Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217
6.5 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
Abbreviations
ABAS Aircraft-based augmentation system

AC Aircraft
ADB Aircraft database
ADF Automatic direction finder
ADS Air data system
ADS-B Automatic dependent surveillance–broadcast
AFS Antenna-feed system
AMS Airborne multifunctional system
CAS Collision avoidance system
DC Differential corrections
DDRE Differential data reception and conversion equipment
DH Decision height
DL Data link
EGPWS Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning System
EWS Emergency warning system
FAS Final approach segment
FI Flight intercom
FM Frequency modulated
FS Flight safety
GBAS GNSS ground-based augmentation system
GISR Ground integrated signal-to-noise ratio
GLONASS GLObal NAvigation Satellite System (Russia)
GLS GBAS landing system
GNSS Global Navigation Satellite System (currently including
GLONASS and GPS)
GNSS/LAAS Onboard satellite-based landing equipment
GPS Global Positioning System (USA)
GSR Ground signal-to-noise ratio
HSI Hardware/software interface
IAC Interstate Aviation Committee
xv
xvi Abbreviations
ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization

ILS Instrument landing system
LAAS Local monitoring and correcting station
LAL Lateral alert limit
LOC Localizer
LPL Lateral protection level
LRBG Landing radar beacon group
MAA Minimum allowable altitude
MDE Minimum detectable error
MMR Multi-mode receiver
MP Multipath
MPD Multipurpose display
NPA “Non-precision” approach
NSV Navigation space vehicle
OISR Onboard integrated signal-to-noise ratio
PLL Phase-lock loop
PPRNS Pulse-phase radionavigation systems
PR Pseudorange
PRNS Phase radionavigation systems
PS Pseudosattelite
RDB Earth relief database
REC Radio-electronic complex
RR GNSS reference receiver
RWY Runway
SBAS GNSS satellite-based augmentation system
SLS Satellite-based landing system
SV Space vehicle
UAV Unmanned aerial vehicle
UTC Coordinated Universal Time
VAL Vertical alert limit
VDB VHF band digital signal for data transmission
VOR VHF omnidirectional radiorange
VPL Vertical protection level
Chapter 1
General Description of Flight Safety
Problems
One of the most important problems that military and civil aviation faces is to ensure
landings with a target level of safety in any weather conditions in any region of the
globe. The solution to this problem depends primarily on the AC and aerodrome
equipment with instrument landing systems [1–4].
At the same time, ensuring flight safety is a complex task, the solution of which
requires the use of other means, such as collision avoidance systems [5–12].
The development and commissioning of these systems provided a significant
reduction in the accident rate. However, to ensure compliance with modern safety
requirements, further improvement is required.
1.1 Analysis of the State and Prospects for the Development

of Instrument Landing Systems and Collision
Avoidance Systems
1.1.1 Instrument Landing Systems
Currently, the most widespread of all instrument landing systems are radio technical
systems based on the use of ground-based radio beacons [2, 4, 13], which form
some fixed distribution of the electromagnetic field (the directional pattern) in space,
on the basis of which it is possible to determine AC deviations from the heading
plane and glide paths during the approach phase. These systems belong to the class
of meter-wave radio beacon systems and have the international designation “ILS”
(Instrument Landing System) [13].
Other types of radio technical landing systems, such as radar (RBS) and those with
scanning beam (microwave landing system), are not so widespread, mainly because
of their high cost.
The characteristics of various types of radio technical landing systems (LSs) are
detailed in the references [1–4, 13].
© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 1
Baburov S.V. et al., Development of Navigation Technology for Flight Safety,
Springer Aerospace Technology, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-8375-5_1
2 1 General Description of Flight Safety Problems
Ground subsystem Onboard subsystem
FNI
Heading channel
LOC receiver
LOC
Glide path channel

Glide path receiver
GSB
Marker channel
Marker Marker
MRB receiver indicator
Fig. 1.1 Instrument landing system structure
The main advantage of systems such as ILS is their wide use, sufficiently high
accuracy of the formation of guidance signals, and reliability. The drawbacks of these
systems include the high cost of equipment and operation.
A general landing system of the ILS type consists of two radio beacons: localizer
(LOC) and glide slope beacon (GSB) [1].
The LS generalized schematic diagram is shown in Fig. 1.1.
The range of LOC operating frequencies is 108–112 MHz. The LOC antenna
system forms simultaneously two horizontal radiation diagrams in the space. As a
result of the summation of signals, the total field is distributed in space in such a way
that there is no error signal along the runway centerline, and in case of a deviation
from the centerline, the signal increases in the positive or negative direction.
The LS onboard equipment measuring the magnitude of the corresponding signal
determines the side and angle of AC deviation from the plane passing through the
runway centerline.
The range of GSB operating frequencies is 329–335 MHz. The directional pattern
of the GSB antenna system is formed as a result of reflection of radio waves from
the ground surface; therefore, there are increased requirements to the underlying
surface directly adjacent to the GSB antenna system. The GSB uses the same working
principle as the LOC.
The intersection of the heading plane and the glide slope plane gives a glide slope
line. Due to uneven terrain and obstacles in the coverage area of the radio beacons,
1.1 Analysis of the State and Prospects for the Development … 3
the glide slope line is subject to curvatures, the magnitude of which is normalized
for each category of the landing system. The glide path angle according to ICAO
requirements is chosen in the range of 2°–4° [1].
For ease of use and monitoring the approach at aerodromes, marker beacons
(MRB) are used that are located on the extended runway centerline from the approach
side. In Russian LSs, two MRBs are usually used (long-range—LRB and short-
range—SRB). The LRB and SRB radiate the radio signal upward in a narrow spatial
sector. Their signals will be received onboard the aircraft only if the aircraft does
not deviate significantly from the heading plane. When the aircraft flies over MRB,
an alert system is activated. The alert of the SRB overflight informs the pilot that
he/she is in the immediate vicinity of the runway and must decide whether to land
or execute a go-around.
In fact, LSs such as ILS form two virtual planes in the space in front of the runway
(RWY): heading and glide slope. The intersection of these planes defines a line in
the space called the glide slope line. The pilot’s task is to keep the aircraft on this line
while performing the approach. Thus, LSs are, in fact, systems providing guidance
to the runway.
At the end of the 50s of the twentieth century, the USSR developed a short-
range radio technical navigation system (SRNS), which included a landing radio
beacon group (LRBG) and a corresponding onboard subsystem [1, 3, 14–17]. In this
landing system operating in the 800–900 MHz band with the same principles as ILS,
the effect of multipath propagation from the earth’s surface has been significantly
reduced. However, the system was used only at military airfields and on military
aircraft, and its cost was still high.
In order to overcome the main drawbacks of the meter-wave LSs, in the 1970s,
the USA, Europe, and the USSR began the development and implementation of a
new landing system that operated in the centimeter range of waves. The system
was named MLS—microwave landing system [1–3]. The MLS system does not
experience problems with reflections of radio signals from the earth’s surface, airfield
structures, and other aircraft in the areas of antenna radiation. It determines the AC
position more accurately at a wide range of angles in front of the runway. When
using the MLS, it becomes possible to perform approaches along curved trajectories,
safety intervals are reduced, and the airport capacity in adverse weather conditions is
increased. However, the cost of the ground and onboard parts of the MLS could not be
significantly reduced in comparison with the ILS equipment, and this fact prevented
airlines and airports from investments in the implementation of this system.
Radar landing systems (RLSs) [1, 3] were not widely used in civil aviation to
provide instrument approaches, also because of the high cost of the ground and
onboard equipment. RLSs are currently mainly used in air traffic control (ATC)
centers to monitor approaches.
The complexity and high cost of equipping aerodromes and aircraft with instru-
ment landing systems still hamper the reduction in the number of accidents and
incidents due to the fact that, for example, in Russia, only 100 out of 1500 operating
aerodromes are equipped with instrument landing systems.
Controls
Onboard Analog or
sensors and digital computer
systems and interface Onboard visual
modules alarms
Onboard sound
alarms
Fig. 1.2 Collision avoidance system structure
For the normal LS operation, airports impose constraints on the movement of

aircraft on the ground so that they do not obscure and do not reflect the LOC and GSB
signals, and this reduces the capacity of airports, especially when operating under
adverse weather conditions. Traditional LSs can serve only for direct approaches
from one side of the runway, since there is only one line of equal intensity of the
beacons. At the same time, in many airports the nature of the terrain requires a more
complex approach, which can be performed with MLSs.
Conventional ILS and MLS approach technologies are currently being developed
mainly by upgrading the onboard equipment, including its integration with the GNSS
equipment [17–19].
Simultaneously with the development of instrument landing systems, collision
avoidance systems were created and improved.
Collision avoidance systems. The first systems of this class were collision avoid-
ance systems, which in ICAO terminology are referred to as ground proximity warn-
ing system (GPWS) developed in the USA [8] and in the USSR [20–22].
The generalized GPWS diagram is shown in Fig. 1.2. The most important GPWS
element is the computer. In it, based on the current values of the signals from the
onboard radio altimeter, the pressure altitude sensor, the air speed sensor, the LS
onboard radio receiver, and also depending on the position of the gear and flaps, the
necessary functions (modes) are implemented and hazardous proximity warnings are
generated. These signals are issued to the onboard visual and sound alarms located
in the cockpit.
According to the statistics of the 1970s, about eight commercial jet planes crashed
every year because of a collision with the underlying surface (according to interna-
tional terminology, such accidents are called CFIT—controlled flight into terrain)
[23, 24], and these accidents occurred with fully controlled aircraft piloted by a
highly qualified flight crew.
Accidents classified as CFIT are the main source of flight accidents [25]; during
the period from 1988 to 1995, 2,200 people died in 37 accidents [26, 27].
1.1 Analysis of the State and Prospects for the Development … 5
Investigations have shown that the main causes of the tragedies were bad weather
conditions, navigation errors, hazardous (challenging) terrain, and communication
problems. For 30 years, in the process of improving the element base and the devel-
opment of computer technology, systems have been improved, but the set of basic
functions of these systems has remained unchanged.
Despite the fact that the introduction of GPWS systems significantly reduced
the number of CFIT accidents, they were not completely eliminated (approximately
35% of all CFIT accidents occurred with aircraft with an installed and functioning
warning system). The main reasons for these accidents were as follows: absence of
alarms (28%); late output of alarms and insufficient time for the pilot to correct the
situation (36%); and inadequate and delayed actions of the flight crew (40%) [28].
Significant progress in reducing aviation accidents has been achieved after the
introduction of new functions that have eliminated the main drawbacks of GPWS
class systems, such as the delayed output of alarms and lack of AC protection from
collisions with the underlying surface and artificial obstacles. These new functions
include the functions of “forward terrain assessment”, “premature descent warning”,
and “showing of the underlying surface nature on the display”.
This additional functionality is based on the use of digital databases of the under-
lying surface, artificial obstacles and the aerodrome database, and, most importantly,
the use of information from the GNSS [29].
The emergence and widespread introduction of the GNSS in aviation has created a
real alternative to conventional radio navigation facilities and has greatly accelerated
the development of ground proximity warning systems, in which the early warn-
ing function has been implemented including the new functions listed above. The
emergence and widespread development of the GNSS in present makes it possible
to suggest new solutions to meet the safety requirements in the terminal area and
during AC landings, and at the same time to transit to the use of relatively inexpensive
equipment. The latter is extremely important for equipping both numerous poorly
equipped aerodromes and landing areas, and the entire AC fleet [30].
The use of the GNSS in military aviation for high-speed aircraft [31] opens up
new opportunities in terms of increasing the mobility and effectiveness of the use of
aircraft, given that currently economic factors play an increasingly important role in
the implementation of military doctrines of the Russian Federation [32, 33].
The use of the GNSS makes it possible to integrate such previously independent
and non-interacting systems as satellite-based landing systems (SLSs) and collision
avoidance systems (CASs) and to ensure their functioning on the basis of common
principles based on GNSS technologies.
In this regard, it is expedient to briefly review the main functions, features of the
construction, and use of the GNSS.
1.2 Features of Global Navigation Satellite Systems

as an Instrument Basis for Improving Flight Safety
A simplified diagram of the GNSS construction is shown in Fig. 1.3 and includes:
a space port, a space vehicle (SV) system, user’s equipment, a command and mea-
surement complex (CMC), and a control center [34–37]. The space port provides
placing SV into the required orbits during the GNSS deployment, as well as periodic
replenishment of the SV number as they reach the end of their life span.
The SV system is a set of navigation satellites (SVs) transmitting information
to users. The satellites have means of spatial stabilization, equipment for trajectory
measurements, telemetry, command and control, as well as power supply and thermal
control systems.
The command and measurement complex (CMC) serves to supply the SVs with
the service information required for navigation sessions, monitoring, and control.
The users’ equipment is designed to receive and process SV signals; for this
purpose, a dedicated computing device is provided in the receiver that solves the
navigation task.
The GNSS operation is based on measuring the distance between the phase centers
of the user equipment antenna and the antennas of the space vehicles, the position of
which is known with high accuracy [34, 36]. The method of measuring the distance
from the SV to the receiver antenna is based on the constancy of the propagation
velocity of radio waves in space. In addition to ephemeris, the satellite transmits time
stamps that allow unambiguous estimation of the receiver timescale offset relative
to the GNSS system time.
Let us introduce the following notation: Rimeas is the measured range from the
receiver to the ith navigation satellite; Δt i is the propagation time of the signal on
Space vehicle system
Space port
Command and Users

Control center measurement
complex
Fig. 1.3 Generalized GNSS diagram

1.2 Features of Global Navigation Satellite Systems as an Instrument Basis … 7
the “ith satellite-user” route at the time of the navigation measurement; and c is the
velocity of propagation of electromagnetic waves in space.
Then, the distance from the user to the ith SV is defined as:
Rimeas = cti . (1.1)
Equation (1.1) can also be written in terms of the coordinates of the ith SV (x i ,
yi , zi ) and the user’s coordinates (x, y, z) to be measured in the Cartesian system:

Rimeas = (x − xi )2 + (y − yi )2 + (z − z i )2 , i = 1, 2, . . . (1.2)
To solve Eq. (1.2), it is necessary to measure ranges of up to three satellites, after

which a system of three nonlinear equations with three unknowns is solved.
However, due to the fact that the SV and the user timescales are not initially syn-
chronized, an error appears in determining the ranges from Eq. (1.2) because of their
discrepancy, but since all ranges are measured instantaneously and the timescales of
the navigation satellites are synchronized, the discrepancy of the “SV-user” scales
at the moment of determining the ranges can be considered as a constant unknown
value to be estimated along with the user’s coordinates. Let us set this unknown value
= hτ . Then, the system of Eq. (1.2) can be written as follows:

Rimeas = (x − xi )2 + (y − yi )2 + (z − z i )2 + c · h τ . (1.3)
Equation (1.3) contains four unknown values x, y, z, hτ , and to solve it, ranges of
at least four satellites are required.
The result of the solution of the system (1.3) with i = 1, 2, 3 … is the user’s
coordinates x, y, z and the discrepancy of the SV network and the user’s equipment
timescales hτ [34, 36].
The discrepancy between the timescales of the navigation satellite network and
the user clock is one of the sources of errors in determining the ranges.
In a more general form, the system of Eq. (1.3) can be written as follows:

Rimeas = (x − xi )2 + (y − yi )2 + (z − z i )2 + c · h τ + i , i = 1, 2, . . . (1.4)
where i are errors in determining the range to the ith SV due to inaccuracy in the
prediction of the ephemeris, errors in the velocity of propagation of radio waves in
the troposphere and ionosphere on the “ith SV-user” routes, multipath errors of the
navigation SV signals at the receiving site, noise in the user equipment reception
channel and natural or intentional interference.
Based on the GNSS general structure and functions, let us briefly consider the
features of building the existing varieties of Russian and foreign global navigation
satellite systems.
Fig. 1.4 GLONASS space

vehicle system
GLONASS. The structure and functions of the Russian GLONASS system gener-
ally correspond to the general GNSS structure (see Fig. 1.3). Features include tech-
nical characteristics and the principle of the formation of navigation signals. The
orbital constellation includes 24 SVs placed in three orbits offset along the equator
by 120°, eight satellites in each, and is characterized by the following parameters:
circular orbit, altitude of 19,100 km, revolution period of 11 h 15 min, and orbit plane
inclination of 64.8° (Fig. 1.4) [34, 37, 38].
The method for dividing the signals emitted by the GLONASS SVs is a frequency
one. The SV signals are identified by the value of the carrier frequency nominal lying
in the allocated frequency band. There are two frequency bands in the L1 (~1.6 GHz)
and L2 (~1.24 GHz) bands provided. Frequency nominals are formed according to
the general rule:
f i j = f j + i F0 j , (1.5)
where f ij are the letter frequency nominals, f j is the first letter frequency, F 0j is the
interval between letter frequencies, i = 0, 1, … 24 are letter numbers in each of the
bands.
For civil users of the GLONASS system, all SVs emit radio signals modulated
with a ranging code and service information in the L1 and L2 bands. At the same
time, radio signals intended for military use are transmitted, which are modulated
by a special code.
The equipment of GLONASS system users in the navigation session makes mea-
surements of range and radial velocity of at least four SVs without requests. Based
on the measurements of the radio navigation parameters and the service information
extracted from the frame, the spatial coordinates (position) of the user are determined
that make up the speed of movement, and the correction of the local timescale to the
GLONASS timescale [37].
Fig. 1.5 GPS space vehicle

system
GPS. The structure of the US GPS system is also constructed in accordance with
the general GNSS structure (see Fig. 1.3). The space vehicle system includes a
minimum of 24 satellites, ensuring a global high-accuracy navigation definition at
any point of time.
The GPS configuration is a collection of six circular orbits at an altitude of about
20,000 km, four satellites in each orbit. Figure 1.5 shows a general view of the space
GPS constellation of satellites [34]. Each GPS satellite emits signals modulated with
two codes: the public C/A, which is intended for civil users, and the protected P
used only by authorized users. Both codes are transmitted at a common frequency
f 1 = 1575.42 MHz, with two carrier components offset by π /2 to eliminate amplitude
modulation. The P and C/A codes are time synchronized and are distance-measuring,
i.e., serve to measure pseudoranges.
To transmit the service information, the code D (Data) is used, which modulates
the two carriers [34, 39].
The GPS system uses a code-based method for dividing signals from various
SVs. The codes are formed by two pseudorandom sequence (PRS) generators; the
selection of the initial shift register of one of the codes distinguishes the generated
code sequence of this ith satellite. Of the large number of possible states, only 32 are
selected, which generate codes with the best characteristics in the time-frequency
plane [34]. Thus, it becomes possible to identify by code all satellites of the system,
the number of which, not counting the backup ones, is 24.
The user equipment measures the SV pseudorange by estimating the delay of
the range PRS and the radial velocity by estimating the Doppler offset of the car-
rier frequency. P and C/A signals are encoded with appropriate service information
containing ephemeris, almanac, frequency-time corrections, time stamps, and infor-
mation on the performance of onboard equipment. With these measurement results,

when using the service information, the navigation-time task is solved.
At present, many countries are deploying their own GNSSs to ensure inde-
pendence from GLONASS and GPS systems controlled by the relevant defense
ministries. The European Union, China, Japan, and India are conducting intensive
research aimed at creating their own GNSSs. It is assumed that these new systems
(Galileo, BeiDou, QZSS, IRNSS) will have characteristics corresponding to those
of GLONASS and GPS.
Galileo. The orbital constellation of the Galileo system will be located in three
circular orbits with an inclination of 56° and a height of 23,616 km, 9 SVs plus a
backup one on each. Together with the upgraded GPS and GLONASS systems, the
Galileo system should form a promising global navigation satellite system. Galileo,
GPS, and GLONASS will be independent, but compatible and interoperable systems,
the joint use of which should provide the required service characteristics for many
applications.
In the Galileo system, it is planned to use 10 navigation signals with right-handed
circular polarization in the frequency ranges of 1164–1215 MHz, 1215–1300 MHz,
and 1559–1592 MHz and one signal for providing search and rescue functions in
cooperation with the Cospas-Sarsat system.
All SVs of the Galileo system will operate at the same frequencies; and to dis-
tinguish the SV signals, the principle of code division of channels, CDMA, will be
used.
COMPASS. The PRC’s own navigation system for the countries of Southeast Asia
and the Pacific is being deployed and by 2015 will be transformed into a full-fledged
GNSS with a system of 25 SVs. The system will consist of four geostationary satel-
lites (GEOs), 12 SVs on inclined geosynchronous orbits, and nine SVs on circular
orbits with a height of 22,000 km. The distance-measuring codes of the COMPASS
system are identical in structure to the signals of the GPS system and contain a
component with and without data.
Currently, the global navigation satellite system, which includes two systems
GLONASS (Russia) and GPS (USA), is an international standard navigation aid
[13] used by aviation users of various types and departments. This means that, firstly,
the GNSS must meet the requirements specified in the international standards and,
secondly, that any changes or additions to the relevant standards can be made on the
basis of prior notification, at least six years before they are implemented.
The position information provided to all GNSS users, including aviation users, is
expressed in geodetic coordinates of the World Geodetic System—1984 (WGS-84).
Time data is expressed in the Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) system.
Let us briefly dwell on the requirements that are imposed on the basic functions and
technical characteristics of the aircraft onboard navigation and information systems
using GNSS data.
In the modern navigation concept developed by ICAO and based on performance
(PBN) [40], it is stated that the requirements for the performance of the onboard area
navigation system (RNAV) shall be defined in terms of accuracy, integrity, avail-
ability, continuity, and functionality, necessary for the performance of the intended
flights in the context of the concept of a specific airspace. The PBN concept is a
transition from navigation based on the use of specific sensors to performance-based
navigation. The performance requirements are specified in the navigation specifica-
tions, which also determine which navigation sensors and equipment can be used to
meet the requirements for the specified performance. These navigation specifications
are described in sufficient detail to ensure coherence at the global level by provid-
ing states and aircraft operators with guidance on the implementation of specific
equipment, including onboard equipment.
The characteristics of the GNSS signal in space are described in detail in [13] under
the assumption of using the concept of a “fail-safe” user receiver and without taking
into account such sources of errors as ionosphere, troposphere, interference, receiver
noise, and multipath. This theoretical receiver is used only as a means of determining
the performance for combinations of various GNSS elements. It is assumed that the
“fail-safe” receiver shall be a receiver with nominal performance of accuracy and
time-to-alert, and that such a receiver shall not have failures that affect integrity,
availability, and continuity.
Let us consider the basic requirements from aviation users to the performance of
the onboard equipment and compare them with the performance potentially provided
by the GNSS system.
Accuracy. Requirements for the accuracy of the user equipment using standard
accuracy signals from navigation GLONASS SVs are specified in regulatory doc-
uments [13, 38, 40]. It is assumed that to determine navigation parameters in the
onboard GNSS equipment, SVs with a mask angle of 5 are used, and the user is
in the near-Earth space that extends up to an altitude of 2000 km above the Earth’s
surface.
The error in determining the horizontal coordinates (positioning) in the onboard
satellite navigation equipment (OSNE) [41] shall be no worse than 32 m (with prob-
ability 0.95) when the aircraft moves with a horizontal acceleration of not more than
5.7 m/s2 and the acceleration rate of not more than 2.5 m/c3 . At the same time, the
geometric factor HDOP, which characterizes the SV coordinates in the sky used to
determine the position, shall be no more than 1.5.
For the “fail-safe” user receiver, [13] states that position errors in the horizontal
plane of the GLONASS standard accuracy channel do not exceed 19 m (the global
average for 95% of the time) and do not exceed 44 m for the worst site in the near-
Earth space (for 95% time).
The error in determining the altitude above the surface of the reference ellipsoid in
the OSNE [13] shall be no worse than 66 m (with probability 0.95) when the aircraft
moves with a vertical acceleration of not more than 4.9 m/s2 and the acceleration
rate of not more than 2.5 m/c3 . In this case, the geometric factor VDOP, which
characterizes the NSV coordinates in the sky used to determine the position, shall
be no more than 3.0.
For the “fail-safe” user receiver, [13] states that position errors in the vertical plane
of the GLONASS standard accuracy channel do not exceed 29 m (the global average
for 95% of the time) and do not exceed 93 m for the worst site in the near-Earth space
(for 95% time).
In the OSNE, the ground speed with a probability of 0.95 in the flight conditions
specified above shall be determined with an error of not more than 0.3 m/s, and the
track angle with a probability of 0.95 with a change in the ground speed from 100 to
1200 km/h in the flight conditions specified above shall be determined with an error
of 35 to 3 angular minutes.
The current UTC time shall be output by the OSNE with an error of not more than
0.001 s with a probability of 0.95. For the “fail-safe” user receiver, it was determined
in [13] that errors in the transmission of time data in the GLONASS standard accuracy
channel do not exceed 700 ns for 95% of the time.
Continuity. Continuity of the service for the system is the capability of the system
to perform its functions during the intended operation without unscheduled interrup-
tions. Continuity of the service is the average probability that during a given period,
the characteristics of the parameters are within the established tolerances [13].
The OSNE shall provide the continuity of data output at all stages of the aircraft
flight, except for precise approaches, with a value not worse than 1 × 10−4 /h, and
for precise approaches with a value not worse than 1–8 × 10−8 for 15 s.
For the “fail-safe” user receiver, it is determined in [13] that continuity shall be
no worse than 1 × 10−4 /h.
Availability. Availability represents the percentage of time at any 24-h interval in
which it is predicted that a 95% position error (due to errors in the space segment and
in the control segment) is less than the threshold value for any point in the coverage
area. It is based on a 95% threshold value for allowable errors in the horizontal and
vertical planes and operation within the volume of service during any 24-h interval.
The availability of service assumes the worst combination of two non-operating
satellites.
The onboard avionics shall provide availability not worse than 0.95. For the “fail-
safe” user receiver, it was determined in [13] that the availability of the GLONASS
standard accuracy channel is at least 99% for servicing in the horizontal and vertical
planes on the average and at least 90% for the worst sites.
Integrity. The integrity in aviation applications means the measure of confidence
that can be attributed to the correctness of information output by the system in general.
Integrity includes the capability of the system to provide the user with timely and
reasonable alerts (alarms).
Regardless of the integrity monitoring method, the OSNE shall provide integrity
monitoring by horizontal coordinates with the following characteristics [41]: Prob-
ability of missing an alarm signal is not more than 0.001 for one flight hour and
probability of outputting a false alarm signal is not more than 10−5 for one flight
hour.
For the “fail-safe” user receiver, it was determined in [13] that the integrity shall
be not less than 1 × 10−7 /h for en route flights and in the terminal area, and at least
1–2 × 10−7 per approach for the approach phase.
The analysis of the above requirements of aviation users for accuracy, continuity,
availability, and integrity and their comparison with the potential capabilities of
the GLONASS system show that these requirements can be ensured when using
the GLONASS data. However, this does not mean that special measures are not
Table 1.1 GNSS performance

Name Value
GLONASS GPS Galileo
Position accuracy in plan view (95%) (m) 5 3 4
Altitude accuracy (95%) (m) 14 12 10
Velocity accuracy (95%) (m/c) 0.3 0.02 0.02
Accuracy of UTC referencing 5 ns 3 ns 3 nc
Global availability (%) 100 100 99.8
required to improve the OSNE performance. In particular, various functional GNSS

augmentations will be considered—space-, ground-, and aircraft-based ones ensuring
the required OSNE performance.
The main characteristics of the global navigation satellite systems GLONASS
and GPS considered above are given in Table 1.1.
The requirements to the GNSS performance in general are given in Table 1.2.
To ensure that the position error is acceptable, an alert limit is defined that is the
largest position error providing a secure operation. The position error shall not exceed
this limit without triggering an alert. Similar to the ILS, the system can degrade in
the direction of increasing the error beyond 95%, but not exceeding the control limit.
The requirements for alert limits are given in Table 1.3.
The requirement for the indicator of the navigation system integrity for an individ-
ual aircraft to support en route flights (without landing), operations in the terminal
area, the initial approach phase, non-precision approaches, and departures deter-
mined at the GNSS receiver output is assumed to be 1 × 10−5 /h [41]. The signal
in space transmitted by satellite navigation systems simultaneously serves a large
number of aircraft flying along the route, and therefore, the consequences of the
system integrity loss for the air traffic control system will be greater than when using
conventional navigation aids.
In this regard, the requirements presented in Table 1.2 are more stringent than
those for conventional non-aviation equipment of the users that allows a position
error of up to 100 m.
For GNSS-based precision approach operations, the integrity requirements in
Table 1.3 were selected in accordance with ILS requirements.
A range of values is defined for Cat. I precision approaches. The value of 4.0 m
is determined by the technical requirements of the ILS system and is a conservative
conclusion from these requirements.
The analysis of the presented structures and performance of various GNSSs shows
that their main advantage is a global coverage area comprising all regions of flights
of various AC types, independence from weather conditions and the capability to use
them on any AC type.
However, the GNSS accuracy, integrity, continuity, and availability performance
do not meet the requirements for landing systems and flight safety in general.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
even to forgotten and moth-eaten twopenny pamphlets, which may
be used to the disadvantage of his own country. But, as to the
Hartford Convention, sir, allow me to say that the proceedings of
that body seem now to be less read and studied in New England than
farther south. They appear to be looked to, not in New England, but
elsewhere, for the purpose of seeing how far they may serve as a
precedent. But they will not answer the purpose—they are quite too
tame. The latitude in which they originated was too cold. Other
conventions, of more recent existence, have gone a whole bar’s
length beyond it. The learned doctors of Colleton and Abbeville have
pushed their commentaries on the Hartford collect so far that the
original text writers are thrown entirely into the shade. I have
nothing to do, sir, with the Hartford Convention. Its journal, which
the gentleman has quoted, I never read. So far as the honorable
member may discover in its proceedings a spirit in any degree
resembling that which was avowed and justified in those other
conventions to which I have alluded, or so far as those proceedings
can be shown to be disloyal to the constitution, or tending to
disunion, so far I shall be as ready as any one to bestow on them
reprehension and censure.
Having dwelt long on this convention, and other occurrences of
that day, in the hope, probably, (which will not be gratified,) that I
should leave the course of this debate to follow him at length in those
excursions, the honorable member returned, and attempted another
object. He referred to a speech of mine in the other house, the same
which I had occasion to allude to myself the other day; and has
quoted a passage or two from it, with a bold though uneasy and
laboring air of confidence, as if he had detected in me an
inconsistency. Judging from the gentleman’s manner, a stranger to
the course of the debate, and to the point in discussion, would have
imagined, from so triumphant a tone, that the honorable member
was about to overwhelm me with a manifest contradiction. Any one
who heard him, and who had not heard what I had, in fact,
previously said, must have thought me routed and discomfited, as
the gentleman had promised. Sir, a breath blows all this triumph
away. There is not the slightest difference in the sentiments of my
remarks on the two occasions. What I said here on Wednesday is in
exact accordance with the opinions expressed by me in the other
house in 1825. Though the gentleman had the metaphysics of
Hudibras—though he were able
“to sever and divide
A hair ’twixt north and north west side,”
he could not yet insert his metaphysical scissors between the fair
reading of my remarks in 1825 and what I said here last week. There
is not only no contradiction, no difference, but, in truth, too exact a
similarity, both in thought and language, to be entirely in just taste. I
had myself quoted the same speech; had recurred to it, and spoke
with it open before me; and much of what I said was little more than
a repetition from it. In order to make finishing work with this alleged
contradiction, permit me to recur to the origin of this debate, and
review its course. This seems expedient, and may be done as well
now as at any time.
Well, then, its history is this: the honorable member from
Connecticut moved a resolution, which constituted the first branch of
that which is now before us; that is to say, a resolution instructing
the committee on public lands to inquire into the expediency of
limiting, for a certain period, the sales of public lands to such as have
heretofore been offered for sale; and whether sundry offices,
connected with the sales of the lands, might not be abolished without
detriment to the public service.
In the progress of the discussion which arose on this resolution, an
honorable member from New Hampshire moved to amend the
resolution, so as entirely to reverse its object; that is to strike it all
out, and insert a direction to the committee to inquire into the
expediency of adopting measures to hasten the sales, and extend
more rapidly the surveys of the lands.
The honorable member from Maine (Mr. Sprague) suggested that
both these propositions might well enough go, for consideration, to
the committee; and in this state of the question, the member from
South Carolina addressed the Senate in his first speech. He rose, he
said, to give his own free thoughts on the public lands. I saw him
rise, with pleasure, and listened with expectation, though before he
concluded I was filled with surprise. Certainly, I was never more
surprised than to find him following up, to the extent he did, the
sentiments and opinions which the gentleman from Missouri had put
forth, and which it is known he has long entertained.
I need not repeat, at large, the general topics of the honorable
gentleman’s speech. When he said, yesterday, that he did not attack
the Eastern States, he certainly must have forgotten not only
particular remarks, but the whole drift and tenor of his speech;
unless he means by not attacking, that he did not commence
hostilities, but that another had preceded him in the attack. He, in
the first place, disapproved of the whole course of the government
for forty years, in regard to its dispositions of the public land; and
then, turning northward and eastward, and fancying he had found a
cause for alleged narrowness and niggardliness in the “accursed
policy” of the tariff, to which he represented the people of New
England as wedded, he went on, for a full hour, with remarks, the
whole scope of which was to exhibit the results of this policy, in
feelings and in measures unfavorable to the west. I thought his
opinions unfounded and erroneous, as to the general course of the
government, and ventured to reply to them.
The gentleman had remarked on the analogy of other cases, and
quoted the conduct of European governments towards their own
subjects, settling on this continent, as in point, to show that we had
been harsh and rigid in selling when we should have given the public
lands to settlers. I thought the honorable member had suffered his
judgment to be betrayed by a false analogy; that he was struck with
an appearance of resemblance where there was no real similitude. I
think so still. The first settlers of North America were enterprising
spirits, engaging in private adventure, or fleeing from tyranny at
home. When arrived here, they were forgotten by the mother
country, or remembered only to be oppressed. Carried away again by
the appearance of analogy, or struck with the eloquence of the
passage, the honorable member yesterday observed that the conduct
of government towards the western emigrants, or my representation
of it, brought to his mind a celebrated speech in the British
Parliament. It was, sir, the speech of Colonel Barre. On the question
of the stamp act, or tea tax, I forget which, Colonel Barre had heard a
member on the treasury bench argue, that the people of the United
States, being British colonists, planted by the maternal care,
nourished by the indulgence, and protected by the arms of England,
would not grudge their mite to relieve the mother country from the
heavy burden under which she groaned. The language of Colonel
Barre, in reply to this, was, “They planted by your care? Your
oppression planted them in America. They fled from your tyranny,
and grew by your neglect of them. So soon as you began to care for
them, you showed your care by sending persons to spy out their
liberties, misrepresent their character, prey upon them, and eat out
their substance.”
And does this honorable gentleman mean to maintain that
language like this is applicable to the conduct of the government of
the United States towards the western emigrants, or to any
representation given by me of that conduct? Were the settlers in the
west driven thither by our oppression? Have they flourished only by
our neglect of them? Has the government done nothing but prey
upon them, and eat out their substance? Sir, this fervid eloquence of
the British speaker, just when and where it was uttered, and fit to
remain an exercise for the schools, is not a little out of place, when it
was brought thence to be applied here, to the conduct of our own
country towards her own citizens. From America to England it may
be true; from Americans to their own government it would be
strange language. Let us leave it to be recited and declaimed by our
boys against a foreign nation; not introduce it here, to recite and
declaim ourselves against our own.
But I come to the point of the alleged contradiction. In my remarks
on Wednesday, I contended that we could not give away gratuitously
all the public lands; that we held them in trust; that the government
had solemnly pledged itself to dispose of them as a common fund for
the common benefit, and to sell and settle them as its discretion
should dictate. Now, sir, what contradiction does the gentleman find
to this sentiment in the speech of 1825? He quotes me as having then
said, that we ought not to hug these lands as a very great treasure.
Very well, sir; supposing me to be accurately reported in that
expression, what is the contradiction? I have not now said, that we
should hug these lands as a favorite source of pecuniary income. No
such thing. It is not my view. What I have said, and what I do say, is,
that they are a common fund—to be disposed of for the common
benefit—to be sold at low prices, for the accommodation of settlers,
keeping the object of settling the lands as much in view as that of
raising money from them. This I say now, and this I have always
said. Is this hugging them as a favorite treasure? Is there no
difference between hugging and hoarding this fund, on the one hand,
as a great treasure, and on the other of disposing of it at low prices,
placing the proceeds in the general treasury of the Union? My
opinion is, that as much is to be made of the land, as fair and
reasonably may be, selling it all the while at such rates as to give the
fullest effect to settlement. This is not giving it all away to the states,
as the gentleman would propose, nor is it hugging the fund closely
and tenaciously, as a favorite treasure; but it is, in my judgment, a
just and wise policy, perfectly according with all the various duties
which rest on government. So much for my contradiction. And what
is it? Where is the ground of the gentleman’s triumph? What
inconsistency, in word or doctrine, has he been able to detect? Sir, if
this be a sample of that discomfiture with which the honorable
gentleman threatened me, commend me to the word discomfiture for
the rest of my life.
But, after all, this is not the point of the debate; and I must bring
the gentleman back to that which is the point.
The real question between me and him is, Where has the doctrine
been advanced, at the south or the east, that the population of the
west should be retarded, or, at least, need not be hastened, on
account of its effect to drain off the people from the Atlantic States?
Is this doctrine, as has been alleged, of eastern origin? That is the
question. Has the gentleman found anything by which he can make
good his accusation? I submit to the Senate, that he has entirely
failed; and as far as this debate has shown, the only person who has
advanced such sentiments is a gentleman from South Carolina, and a
friend to the honorable member himself. This honorable gentleman
has given no answer to this; there is none which can be given. This
simple fact, while it requires no comment to enforce it, defies all
argument to refute it. I could refer to the speeches of another
southern gentleman, in years before, of the same general character,
and to the same effect, as that which has been quoted; but I will not
consume the time of the Senate by the reading of them.
So then, sir, New England is guiltless of the policy of retarding
western population, and of all envy and jealousy of the growth of the
new states. Whatever there be of that policy in the country, no part of
it is hers. If it has a local habitation, the honorable member has
probably seen, by this time, where he is to look for it; and if it now
has received a name, he himself has christened it.
We approach, at length, sir, to a more important part of the
honorable gentleman’s observations. Since it does not accord with
my views of justice and policy, to vote away the public lands
altogether, as mere matter of gratuity, I am asked, by the honorable
gentleman, on what ground it is that I consent to give them away in
particular instances. How, he inquires, do I reconcile with these
professed sentiments my support of measures appropriating portions
of the lands to particular roads, particular canals, particular rivers,
and particular institutions of education in the west? This leads, sir, to
the real and wide difference in political opinions between the
honorable gentleman and myself. On my part, I look upon all these
objects as connected with the common good, fairly embraced in its
objects and its terms; he, on the contrary, deems them all, if good at
all, only local good. This is our difference. The interrogatory which
he proceeded to put, at once explains this difference. “What interest,”
asks he, “has South Carolina in a canal in Ohio?” Sir, this very
question is full of significance. It develops the gentleman’s whole
political system; and its answer expounds mine. Here we differ toto
cœlo. I look upon a road over the Alleghany, a canal round the falls of
the Ohio, or a canal or railway from the Atlantic to the western
waters, as being objects large and extensive enough to be fairly said
to be for the common benefit. The gentleman thinks otherwise, and
this is the key to open his construction of the powers of the
government. He may well ask, upon his system, What interest has
South Carolina in a canal in Ohio? On that system, it is true, she has
no interest. On that system, Ohio and Carolina are different
governments and different countries, connected here, it is true, by
some slight and ill-defined bond of union, but in all main respects
separate and diverse. On that system, Carolina has no more interest
in a canal in Ohio than in Mexico. The gentleman, therefore, only
follows out his own principles; he does no more than arrive at the
natural conclusions of his own doctrines; he only announces the true
results of that creed which he has adopted himself, and would
persuade others to adopt, when he thus declares that South Carolina
has no interest in a public work in Ohio. Sir, we narrow-minded
people of New England do not reason thus. Our notion of things is
entirely different. We look upon the states not as separated, but as
united. We love to dwell on that Union, and on the mutual happiness
which it has so much promoted, and the common renown which it
has so greatly contributed to acquire. In our contemplation, Carolina
and Ohio are parts of the same country—states united under the
same general government, having interests common, associated,
intermingled. In whatever is within the proper sphere of the
constitutional power of this government, we look upon the states as
one. We do not impose geographical limits to our patriotic feeling or
regard; we do not follow rivers, and mountains, and lines of latitude,
to find boundaries beyond which public improvements do not benefit
us. We, who come here as agents and representatives of those
narrow-minded and selfish men of New England, consider ourselves
as bound to regard, with equal eye, the good of the whole, in
whatever is within our power of legislation. Sir, if a railroad or canal,
beginning in South Carolina, appeared to me to be of national
importance and national magnitude, believing as I do that the power
of government extends to the encouragement of works of that
description, if I were to stand up here and ask, “What interest has
Massachusetts in a railroad in South Carolina?” I should not be
willing to face my constituents. These same narrow-minded men
would tell me that they had sent me to act for the whole country, and
that one who possessed too little comprehension, either of intellect
or feeling—one who was not large enough, in mind and heart, to
embrace the whole—was not fit to be intrusted with the interest of
any part. Sir, I do not desire to enlarge the powers of government by
unjustifiable construction, nor to exercise any not within a fair
interpretation. But when it is believed that a power does exist, then it
is, in my judgment, to be exercised for the general benefit of the
whole: so far as respects the exercise of such a power, the states are
one. It was the very great object of the constitution to create unity of
interests to the extent of the powers of the general government. In
war and peace we are one; in commerce one; because the authority of
the general government reaches to war and peace, and to the
regulation of commerce. I have never seen any more difficulty in
erecting lighthouses on the lakes than on the ocean; in improving the
harbors of inland seas, than if they were within the ebb and flow of
the tide; or of removing obstructions in the vast streams of the west,
more than in any work to facilitate commerce on the Atlantic coast. If
there be power for one, there is power also for the other; and they are
all and equally for the country.
There are other objects, apparently more local, or the benefit of
which is less general, towards which, nevertheless, I have concurred
with others to give aid by donations of land. It is proposed to
construct a road in or through one of the new states in which the
government possesses large quantities of land. Have the United
States no right, as a great and untaxed proprietor—are they under no
obligation—to contribute to an object thus calculated to promote the
common good of all the proprietors, themselves included? And even
with respect to education, which is the extreme case, let the question
be considered. In the first place, as we have seen, it was made matter
of compact with these states that they should do their part to
promote education. In the next place, our whole system of land laws
proceeds on the idea that education is for the common good;
because, in every division, a certain portion is uniformly reserved
and appropriated for the use of schools. And, finally have not these
new states singularly strong claims, founded on the ground already
stated, that the government is a great untaxed proprietor in the
ownership of the soil? It is a consideration of great importance that
probably there is in no part of the country, or of the world, so great a
call for the means of education as in those new states, owing to the
vast number of persons within those ages in which education and
instruction are usually received, if received at all. This is the natural
consequence of recency of settlement and rapid increase. The census
of these states shows how great a proportion of the whole population
occupies the classes between infancy and childhood. These are the
wide fields, and here is the deep and quick soil for the seeds of
knowledge and virtue; and this is the favored season, the spring time
for sowing them. Let them be disseminated without stint. Let them
be scattered with a bountiful broadcast. Whatever the government
can fairly do towards these objects, in my opinion, ought to be done.
These, sir, are the grounds, succinctly stated, on which my vote for
grants of lands for particular objects rest, while I maintain, at the
same time, that it is all a common fund, for the common benefit. And
reasons like these, I presume, have influenced the votes of other
gentlemen from New England. Those who have a different view of
the powers of the government, of course, come to different
conclusions on these as on other questions. I observed, when
speaking on this subject before, that if we looked to any measure,
whether for a road, a canal, or any thing else intended for the
improvement of the west, it would be found, that if the New England
ayes were struck out of the list of votes, the southern noes would
always have rejected the measure. The truth of this has not been
denied, and cannot be denied. In stating this, I thought it just to
ascribe it to the constitutional scruples of the south, rather than to
any other less favorable or less charitable cause. But no sooner had I
done this, than the honorable gentleman asks if I reproach him and
his friends with their constitutional scruples. Sir, I reproach nobody.
I stated a fact, and gave the most respectful reason for it that
occurred to me. The gentleman cannot deny the fact—he may, if he
choose, disclaim the reason. It is not long since I had occasion, in
presenting a petition from his own state, to account for its being
intrusted to my hands by saying, that the constitutional opinions of
the gentleman and his worthy colleague prevented them from
supporting it. Sir, did I state this as a matter of reproach? Far from it.
Did I attempt to find any other cause than an honest one for these
scruples? Sir, I did not. It did not become me to doubt, nor to
insinuate that the gentleman had either changed his sentiments, or
that he had made up a set of constitutional opinions, accommodated
to any particular combination of political occurrences. Had I done so,
I should have felt, that while I was entitled to little respect in thus
questioning other people’s motives, I justified the whole world in
suspecting my own.
But how has the gentleman returned this respect for others’
opinions? His own candor and justice, how have they been exhibited
towards the motives of others, while he has been at so much pains to
maintain—what nobody has disputed—the purity of his own? Why,
sir, he has asked when, and how, and why New England votes were
found going for measures favorable to the west; he has demanded to
be informed whether all this did not begin in 1825, and while the
election of President was still pending. Sir, to these questions retort
would be justified; and it is both cogent and at hand. Nevertheless, I
will answer the inquiry not by retort, but by facts. I will tell the
gentleman when, and how, and why New England has supported
measures favorable to the west. I have already referred to the early
history of the government—to the first acquisition of the lands—to
the original laws for disposing of them and for governing the
territories where they lie; and have shown the influence of New
England men and New England principles in all these leading
measures. I should not be pardoned were I to go over that ground
again. Coming to more recent times, and to measures of a less
general character, I have endeavored to prove that every thing of this
kind designed for western improvement has depended on the votes
of New England. All this is true beyond the power of contradiction.
And now, sir, there are two measures to which I will refer, not so
ancient as to belong to the early history of the public lands, and not
so recent as to be on this side of the period when the gentleman
charitably imagines a new direction may have been given to New
England feeling and New England votes. These measures, and the
New England votes in support of them, may be taken as samples and
specimens of all the rest. In 1820, (observe, Mr. President, in 1820,)
the people of the west besought Congress for a reduction in the price
of lands. In favor of that reduction, New England, with a delegation
of forty members in the other house, gave thirty-three votes, and one
only against it. The four Southern States, with fifty members, gave
thirty-two votes for it, and seven against it. Again, in 1821, (observe
again, sir, the time,) the law passed for the relief of the purchasers of
the public lands. This was a measure of vital importance to the west,
and more especially to the southwest. It authorized the
relinquishment of contracts for lands, which had been entered into at
high prices, and a reduction, in other cases, of not less than 37½ per
cent. on the purchase money. Many millions of dollars, six or seven I
believe at least,—probably much more,—were relinquished by this
law. On this bill New England, with her forty members, gave more
affirmative votes than the four Southern States with their fifty-two or
three members. These two are far the most important measures
respecting the public lands which have been adopted within the last
twenty years. They took place in 1820 and 1821. That is the time
when. And as to the manner how, the gentleman already sees that it
was by voting, in solid column, for the required relief; and lastly, as
to the cause why, I tell the gentleman, it was because the members
from New England thought the measures just and salutary; because
they entertained towards the west neither envy, hatred, nor malice;
because they deemed it becoming them, as just and enlightened
public men, to meet the exigency which had arisen in the west with
the appropriate measure of relief; because they felt it due to their
own characters of their New England predecessors in this
government, to act towards the new states in the spirit of a liberal,
patronizing, magnanimous policy. So much, sir, for the cause why;
and I hope that by this time, sir, the honorable gentleman is
satisfied; if not, I do not know when, or how, or why, he ever will be.
Having recurred to these two important measures, in answer to
the gentleman’s inquiries, I must now beg permission to go back to a
period still something earlier, for the purpose still further of showing
how much, or rather how little reason there is for the gentleman’s
insinuation that political hopes, or fears, or party associations, were
the grounds of these New England votes. And after what has been
said, I hope it may be forgiven me if I allude to some political
opinions and votes of my own, of very little public importance,
certainly, but which, from the time at which they were given and
expressed, may pass for good witnesses on this occasion.
This government, Mr. President, from its origin to the peace of
1815, had been too much engrossed with various other important
concerns to be able to turn its thoughts inward, and look to the
development of its vast internal resources. In the early part of
President Washington’s administration, it was fully occupied with
organizing the government, providing for the public debt, defending
the frontiers, and maintaining domestic peace. Before the
termination of that administration, the fires of the French revolution
blazed forth, as from a new opened volcano, and the whole breadth
of the ocean did not entirely secure us from its effects. The smoke
and the cinders reached us, though not the burning lava. Difficult
and agitating questions, embarrassing to government, and dividing
public opinion, sprung out of the new state of our foreign relations,
and were succeeded by others, and yet again by others, equally
embarrassing, and equally exciting division and discord, through the
long series of twenty years, till they finally issued in the war with
England. Down to the close of that war, no distinct, marked and
deliberate attention had been given, or could have been given, to the
internal condition of the country, its capacities of improvement, or
the constitutional power of the government, in regard to objects
connected with such improvement.
The peace, Mr. President, brought about an entirely new and a
most interesting state of things; it opened to us other prospects, and
suggested other duties; we ourselves were changed, and the whole
world was changed. The pacification of Europe, after June, 1815,
assumed a firm and permanent aspect. The nations evidently
manifested that they were disposed for peace: some agitation of the
waves might be expected, even after the storm had subsided; but the
tendency was, strongly and rapidly, towards settled repose.
It so happened, sir, that I was at that time a member of Congress,
and, like others, naturally turned my attention to the contemplation
of the newly-altered condition of the country, and of the world. It
appeared plainly enough to me, as well as to wiser and more
experienced men, that the policy of the government would
necessarily take a start in a new direction, because new directions
would necessarily be given to the pursuits and occupations of the
people. We had pushed our commerce far and fast, under the
advantage of a neutral flag. But there were now no longer flags,
either neutral or belligerent. The harvest of neutrality had been
great, but we had gathered it all. With the peace of Europe, it was
obvious there would spring up, in her circle of nations, a revived and
invigorated spirit of trade, and a new activity in all the business and
objects of civilized life. Hereafter, our commercial gains were to be
earned only by success in a close and intense competition. Other
nations would produce for themselves, and carry for themselves, and
manufacture for themselves, to the full extent of their abilities. The
crops of our plains would no longer sustain European armies, nor
our ships longer supply those whom war had rendered unable to
supply themselves. It was obvious that under these circumstances,
the country would begin to survey itself, and to estimate its own
capacity of improvement. And this improvement, how was it to be
accomplished, and who was to accomplish it?
We were ten or twelve millions of people, spread over almost half a
world. We were twenty-four states, some stretching along the same
seaboard, some along the same line of inland frontier, and others on
opposite banks of the same vast rivers. Two considerations at once
presented themselves, in looking at this state of things, with great
force. One was that that great branch of improvement, which
consisted in furnishing new facilities of intercourse, necessarily ran
into different states, in every leading instance, and would benefit the
citizens of all such states. No one state therefore, in such cases,
would assume the whole expense, nor was the co-operation of several
states to be expected. Take the instance of the Delaware Breakwater.
It will cost several millions of money. Would Pennsylvania, New
Jersey, and Delaware have united to accomplish it at their joint
expense? Certainly not, for the same reason. It could not be done,
therefore, but by the general government. The same may be said of
the large inland undertakings, except that, in them, government,
instead of bearing the whole expense, co-operates with others to bear
a part. The other consideration is, that the United States have the
means. They enjoy the revenues derived from commerce, and the
states have no abundant and easy sources of public income. The
custom houses fill the general treasury, while the states have scanty
resources, except by resort to heavy direct taxes.
Under this view of things, I thought it necessary to settle, at least
for myself, some definite notions, with respect to the powers of
government, in regard to internal affairs. It may not savor too much
of self-commendation to remark, that, with this object, I considered
the constitution, its judicial construction, its contemporaneous
exposition, and the whole history of the legislation of Congress under
it; and I arrived at the conclusion that government had power to
accomplish sundry objects, or aid in their accomplishment, which
are now commonly spoken of as Internal Improvements. That
conclusion, sir, may have been right or it may have been wrong. I am
not about to argue the grounds of it at large. I say only that it was
adopted, and acted on, even so early as in 1816. Yes, Mr. President, I
made up my opinion, and determined on my intended course of
political conduct on these subjects, in the 14th Congress in 1816. And
now, Mr. President, I have further to say, that I made up these
opinions, and entered on this course of political conduct, Teucro
duce. Yes, sir, I pursued, in all this, a South Carolina track. On the
doctrines of internal improvement, South Carolina, as she was then
represented in the other house, set forth, in 1816, under a fresh and
leading breeze; and I was among the followers. But if my leader sees
new lights, and turns a sharp corner, unless I see new lights also, I
keep straight on in the same path. I repeat, that leading gentlemen
from South Carolina were first and foremost in behalf of the
doctrines of internal improvements, when those doctrines first came
to be considered and acted upon in Congress. The debate on the bank
question, on the tariff of 1816, and on the direct tax, will show who
was who, and what was what, at that time. The tariff of 1816, one of
the plain cases of oppression and usurpation, from which, if the
government does not recede, individual states may justly secede
from the government, is, sir, in truth, a South Carolina tariff,
supported by South Carolina votes. But for those votes, it could not
have passed in the form in which it did pass; whereas, if it had
depended on Massachusetts votes, it would have been lost. Does not
the honorable gentleman well know all this? There are certainly
those who do full well know it all. I do not say this to reproach South
Carolina; I only state the fact, and I think it will appear to be true,
that among the earliest and boldest advocates of the tariff, as a
measure of protection, and on the express ground of protection, were
leading gentlemen of South Carolina in Congress. I did not then, and
cannot now, understand their language in any other sense. While this
tariff of 1816 was under discussion in the House of Representatives,
an honorable gentleman from Georgia, now of this house, (Mr.
Forsyth,) moved to reduce the proposed duty on cotton. He failed by
four votes, South Carolina giving three votes (enough to have turned
the scale) against his motion. The act, sir, then passed, and received
on its passage the support of a majority of the representatives of
South Carolina present and voting. This act is the first, in the order
of those now denounced as plain usurpations. We see it daily in the
list by the side of those of 1824 and 1828, as a case of manifest
oppression, justifying disunion. I put it home to the honorable
member from South Carolina, that his own state was not only “art
and part” in this measure, but the causa causans. Without her aid,
this seminal principle of mischief, this root of upas, could not have
been planted. I have already said—and, it is true—that this act
preceded on the ground of protection. It interfered directly with
existing interests of great value and amount. It cut up the Calcutta
cotton trade by the roots. But it passed, nevertheless, and it passed
on the principle of protecting manufactures, on the principle against
free trade, on the principle opposed to that which lets us alone.
Such, Mr. President, were the opinions of important and leading
gentlemen of South Carolina, on the subject of internal
improvement, in 1816. I went out of Congress the next year, and
returning again in 1823, thought I found South Carolina where I had
left her. I really supposed that all things remained as they were, and
that the South Carolina doctrine of internal improvements would be
defended by the same eloquent voices, and the same strong arms as
formerly. In the lapse of these six years, it is true, political
associations had assumed a new aspect and new divisions. A party
had arisen in the south, hostile to the doctrine of internal
improvements, and had vigorously attacked that doctrine. Anti-
consolidation was the flag under which this party fought, and its
supporters inveighed against internal improvements, much after the
same manner in which the honorable gentleman has now inveighed
against them, as part and parcel of the system of consolidation.
Whether this party arose in South Carolina herself, or in her
neighborhood, is more than I know. I think the latter. However that
may have been, there were those found in South Carolina ready to
make war upon it, and who did make intrepid war upon it. Names
being regarded as things, in such controversies, they bestowed on the
anti-improvement gentlemen the appellation of radicals. Yes, sir, the
name of radicals, as a term of distinction, applicable and applied to
those who defended the liberal doctrines of internal improvements,
originated, according to the best of my recollection, somewhere
between North Carolina and Georgia. Well, sir, those mischievous
radicals were to be put down, and the strong arm of South Carolina
was stretched out to put them down. About this time, sir, I returned
to Congress. The battle with the radicals had been fought, and our
South Carolina champions of the doctrine of internal improvements
had nobly maintained their ground, and were understood to have
achieved a victory. They had driven back the enemy with
discomfiture; a thing, by the way, sir, which is not always performed
when it is promised. A gentleman, to whom I have already referred in
this debate, had come into Congress, during my absence from it,
from South Carolina, and had brought with him a high reputation for
ability. He came from a school with which we had been acquainted,
et noscitur a sociis. I hold in my hand, sir, a printed speech of this
distinguished gentleman, (Mr. McDuffie,) “ON INTERNAL
IMPROVEMENTS,” delivered about the period to which I now refer, and
printed with a few introductory remarks upon consolidation; in
which, sir, I think he quite consolidated the arguments of his
opponents, the radicals, if to crush be to consolidate. I give you a
short but substantive quotation from these remarks. He is speaking
of a pamphlet, then recently published, entitled, “Consolidation;”
and having alluded to the question of re-chartering the former Bank
of the United States, he says: “Moreover, in the early history of
parties, and when Mr. Crawford advocated the renewal of the old
charter, it was considered a federal measure; which internal
improvement never was, as this author erroneously states. This latter
measure originated in the administration of Mr. Jefferson, with the
appropriation for the Cumberland road; and was first proposed, as a
system, by Mr. Calhoun, and carried through the House of
Representatives by a large majority of the republicans, including
almost every one of the leading men who carried us through the late
war.”
So, then, internal improvement is not one of the federal heresies.
One paragraph more, sir.
“The author in question, not content with denouncing as
federalists Gen. Jackson, Mr. Adams, Mr. Calhoun, and the majority
of the South Carolina delegation in Congress, modestly extends the
denunciation to Mr. Monroe and the whole republican party. Here
are his words. ‘During the administration of Mr. Monroe, much has
passed which the republican party would be glad to approve, if they
could!! But the principal feature, and that which has chiefly elicited
these observations, is the renewal of the SYSTEM OF INTERNAL
IMPROVEMENTS.’ Now, this measure was adopted by a vote of 115 to
86, of a republican Congress, and sanctioned by a republican
president. Who, then, is this author, who assumes the high
prerogative of denouncing, in the name of the republican party, the
republican administration of the country—a denunciation including
within its sweep Calhoun, Lowndes, and Cheves; men who will be
regarded as the brightest ornaments of South Carolina, and the
strongest pillars of the republican party, as long as the late war shall
be remembered, and talents and patriotism shall be regarded as the
proper objects of the admiration and gratitude of a free people!!”
Such are the opinions, sir, which were maintained by South
Carolina gentlemen in the House of Representatives on the subject of
internal improvements, when I took my seat there as a member from
Massachusetts, in 1823. But this is not all; we had a bill before us,
and passed it in that house, entitled, “An act to procure the necessary
surveys, plans, and estimates upon the subject of roads and canals.”
It authorized the president to cause surveys and estimates to be
made of the routes of such roads and canals as he might deem of
national importance in a commercial or military point of view, or
for the transportation of the mail; and appropriated thirty thousand
dollars out of the treasury to defray the expense. This act, though
preliminary in its nature, covered the whole ground. It took for
granted the complete power of internal improvement, as far as any of
its advocates had ever contended for it. Having passed the other
house, the bill came up to the Senate, and was here considered and
debated in April, 1824. The honorable member from South Carolina
was a member of the Senate at that time. While the bill was under
consideration here, a motion was made to add the following proviso:
—
“Provided, That nothing herein contained shall be construed to
affirm or admit a power in Congress, on their own authority, to make
roads or canals within any of the states of the Union.”
The yeas and nays were taken on this proviso, and the honorable
member voted in the negative. The proviso failed.
A motion was then made to add this proviso, viz:—
“Provided, That the faith of the United States is hereby pledged,
that no money shall ever be expended for roads or canals except it
shall be among the several states, and in the same proportion as
direct taxes are laid and assessed by the provisions of the
constitution.”
The honorable member voted against this proviso also, and it
failed.
The bill was then put on its passage, and the honorable member
voted for it, and it passed, and became a law.
Now, it strikes me, sir, that there is no maintaining these votes but
upon the power of internal improvement, in its broadest sense. In
truth, these bills for surveys and estimates have always been
considered as test questions. They show who is for and who against
internal improvement. This law itself went the whole length, and
assumed the full and complete power. The gentleman’s vote
sustained that power, in every form in which the various
propositions to amend presented it. He went for the entire and
unrestrained authority, without consulting the states, and without
agreeing to any proportionate distribution. And now, suffer me to
remind you, Mr. President, that it is this very same power, thus
sanctioned, in every form, by the gentleman’s own opinion, that is so
plain and manifest a usurpation, that the state of South Carolina is
supposed to be justified in refusing submission to any laws carrying
the power into effect. Truly, sir, is not this a little too hard? May we
not crave some mercy, under favor and protection of the gentleman’s
own authority? Admitting that a road or a canal must be written
down flat usurpation as ever was committed, may we find no
mitigation in our respect for his place, and his vote, as one that
knows the law?
The tariff which South Carolina had an efficient hand in
establishing in 1816, and this asserted power of internal
improvement—advanced by her in the same year, and, as we have
seen, approved and sanctioned by her representatives in 1824,—
these two measures are the great grounds on which she is now
thought to be justified in breaking up the Union, if she sees fit to
break it up.
I may now safely say, I think, that we have had the authority of
leading and distinguished gentlemen from South Carolina in support
of the doctrine of internal improvement. I repeat that, up to 1824, I,
for one, followed South Carolina; but when that star in its ascension
veered off in an unexpected direction, I relied on its light no longer.
[Here the Vice-President said, Does the Chair understand the
gentleman from Massachusetts to say that the person now occupying
the chair of the Senate has changed his opinion on the subject of
internal improvement?] From nothing ever said to me, sir, have I
had reason to know of any change in the opinions of the person
filling the chair of the Senate. If such change has taken place, I regret
it; I speak generally of the state of South Carolina. Individuals we
know there are who hold opinions favorable to the power. An
application for its exercise in behalf of a public work in South
Carolina itself is now pending, I believe, in the other house,
presented by members from that state.
I have thus, sir, perhaps not without some tediousness of detail,
shown that, if I am in error on the subject of internal improvements,
how and in what company I fell into that error. If I am wrong, it is
apparent who misled me.
I go to other remarks of the honorable member—and I have to
complain of an entire misapprehension of what I said on the subject
of the national debt—though I can hardly perceive how any one could
misunderstand me. What I said was, not that I wished to put off the
payment of the debt, but, on the contrary, that I had always voted for
every measure for its reduction, as uniformly as the gentleman
himself. He seems to claim the exclusive merit of a disposition to
reduce the public charge; I do not allow it to him. As a debt, I was, I
am, for paying it; because it is a charge on our finances, and on the
industry of the country. But I observed that I thought I perceived a
morbid fervor on that subject; an excessive anxiety to pay off the
debt; not so much because it is a debt simply, as because, while it
lasts, it furnishes one objection to disunion. It is a tie of common
interest while it lasts. I did not impute such motive to the honorable
member himself; but that there is such a feeling in existence I have
not a particle of doubt. The most I said was, that if one effect of the
debt was to strengthen our Union, that effect itself was not regretted
by me, however much others might regret it. The gentleman has not
seen how to reply to this otherwise than by supposing me to have
advanced the doctrine that a national debt is a national blessing.
Others, I must hope, will find less difficulty in understanding me. I
distinctly and pointedly cautioned the honorable member not to
understand me as expressing an opinion favorable to the
continuance of the debt. I repeated this caution, and repeated it more
than once—but it was thrown away.
On yet another point I was still more unaccountably
misunderstood. The gentleman had harangued against
“consolidation.” I told him, in reply, that there was one kind of
consolidation to which I was attached, and that was, the
consolidation of our Union; and that this was precisely that
consolidation to which I feared others were not attached; that such
consolidation was the very end of the constitution—the leading
object, as they had informed us themselves, which its framers had
kept in view. I turned to their communication, and read their very
words,—“the consolidation of the Union,”—and expressed my
devotion to this sort of consolidation. I said in terms that I wished
not, in the slightest degree, to augment the powers of this
government; that my object was to preserve, not to enlarge; and that,
by consolidating the Union, I understood no more than the
strengthening of the Union and perpetuating it. Having been thus
explicit; having thus read, from the printed book, the precise words
which I adopted, as expressing my own sentiments, it passes
comprehension, how any man could understand me as contending
for an extension of the powers of the government, or for
consolidation in the odious sense in which it means an accumulation,
in the federal government, of the powers properly belonging to the
states.
I repeat, sir, that, in adopting the sentiments of the framers of the
constitution, I read their language audibly, and word for word; and I
pointed out the distinction, just as fully as I have now done, between
the consolidation of the Union and that other obnoxious
consolidation which I disclaimed; and yet the honorable gentleman
misunderstood me. The gentleman had said that he wished for no
fixed revenue—not a shilling. If, by a word, he could convert the
Capitol into gold, he would not do it. Why all this fear of revenue?
Why, sir, because, as the gentleman told us, it tends to consolidation.
Now, this can mean neither more or less than that a common
revenue is a common interest, and that all common interests tend to
hold the union of the states together. I confess I like that tendency; if
the gentleman dislikes it, he is right in deprecating a shilling’s fixed
revenue. So much, sir, for consolidation.
As well as I recollect the course of his remarks, the honorable
gentleman next recurred to the subject of the tariff. He did not doubt
the word must be of unpleasant sound to me, and proceeded, with an
effort neither new nor attended with new success, to involve me and
my votes in inconsistency and contradiction. I am happy the
honorable gentleman has furnished me an opportunity of a timely
remark or two on that subject. I was glad he approached it, for it is a
question I enter upon without fear from any body. The strenuous toil
of the gentleman has been to raise an inconsistency between my
dissent to the tariff, in 1824 and my vote in 1828. It is labor lost. He
pays undeserved compliment to my speech in 1824; but this is to
raise me high, that my fall, as he would have it, in 1828 may be the
more signal. Sir, there was no fall at all. Between the ground I stood
on in 1824 and that I took in 1828, there was not only no precipice,
but no declivity. It was a change of position, to meet new
circumstances, but on the same level. A plain tale explains the whole

PDF Development of Navigation Technology For Flight Safety Baburov S V Ebook Full Chapter

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

PDF Development of Navigation Technology For Flight Safety Baburov S V Ebook Full Chapter

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PDF Development of Navigation Technology For Flight Safety Baburov S V Ebook Full Chapter

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Development of Navigation Technology

for Flight Safety Baburov S.V.

Development and Testing of Navigation Algorithms for

Embedded Software Development for Safety-Critical

Embedded Software Development for Safety-Critical

Flight Mechanics Theory of Flight Paths 1st Edition

Spatial Information Technology for Sustainable

Information and Communication Technology for

Technology Development Multidimensional Review for

Advanced Flight Dynamics with Elements of Flight

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/8613

Galyamov A.M. Sauta O.I.

Galyamov A.M. Sauta O.I.

ISSN 1869-1730 ISSN 1869-1749 (electronic)

Thus, it is topical to develop and scientiﬁcally substantiate new methodological

1 General Description of Flight Safety Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1

2.4 Directions and Methods to Enhance Satellite-Based Landing

5 Integrated Technical Solutions on the Joint Use of Technologies

ABAS Aircraft-based augmentation system

ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization

1.1 Analysis of the State and Prospects for the Development

1.1.1 Instrument Landing Systems

Ground subsystem Onboard subsystem

Glide path channel

Fig. 1.1 Instrument landing system structure

Fig. 1.2 Collision avoidance system structure

For the normal LS operation, airports impose constraints on the movement of

1.2 Features of Global Navigation Satellite Systems

Space vehicle system

Command and Users

Fig. 1.3 Generalized GNSS diagram

Rimeas = cti . (1.1)

To solve Eq. (1.2), it is necessary to measure ranges of up to three satellites, after

Fig. 1.4 GLONASS space

Fig. 1.5 GPS space vehicle

mation on the performance of onboard equipment. With these measurement results,

Table 1.1 GNSS performance

required to improve the OSNE performance. In particular, various functional GNSS

You might also like