5 Principles of Integrated Airborne Avionics 978-981!16!0897-1

Springer Aerospace Technology
Igor Victorovich Avtin

Vladimir Ivanovich Baburov
Boris Victorovich Ponomarenko
Yuri Grigorievich Shatrakov
Principles
of Integrated
Airborne
Avionics
Series Editors
Sergio De Rosa, DII, University of Naples Federico II, Napoli, Italy
Yao Zheng, School of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Zhejiang University,
Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
The series explores the technology and the science related to the aircraft and
spacecraft including concept, design, assembly, control and maintenance. The
topics cover aircraft, missiles, space vehicles, aircraft engines and propulsion units.
The volumes of the series present the fundamentals, the applications and the
advances in all the fields related to aerospace engineering, including:
• structural analysis,
• aerodynamics,
• aeroelasticity,
• aeroacoustics,
• flight mechanics and dynamics,
• orbital maneuvers,
• avionics,
• systems design,
• materials technology,
• launch technology,
• payload and satellite technology,
• space industry, medicine and biology.
The series’ scope includes monographs, professional books, advanced textbooks,

as well as selected contributions from specialized conferences and workshops.
The volumes of the series are single-blind peer-reviewed.
To submit a proposal or request further information, please contact:
Mr. Pierpaolo Riva at pierpaolo.riva@springer.com (Europe and Americas)
Mr. Mengchu Huang at mengchu.huang@springer.com (China)
The series is indexed in Scopus and Compendex
More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/8613

Igor Victorovich Avtin ·
Vladimir Ivanovich Baburov ·
Boris Victorovich Ponomarenko ·
Yuri Grigorievich Shatrakov
Principles of Integrated
Airborne Avionics
Igor Victorovich Avtin Vladimir Ivanovich Baburov
Moscow, Russia Moscow, Russia
Boris Victorovich Ponomarenko Yuri Grigorievich Shatrakov

Moscow, Russia Saint Petersburg, Russia
ISSN 1869-1730 ISSN 1869-1749 (electronic)

ISBN 978-981-16-0896-4 ISBN 978-981-16-0897-1 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-0897-1
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature
Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed 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 most important link in the global transport system is civil aviation. With its
help, the bulk of passenger traffic over long distances (over 1000 km) is carried out.
The scale of freight traffic by air transport is high (up to 30% of the total volume
of transport traffic of world civil aviation). Significant development was gained by
business (administrative) aviation and general aviation (GA). In total, more than
18 thousand long-haul aircrafts (VL) with a take-off weight of more than 9 tons,
more than 20 thousand business jets, more than 330 thousand flying devices of
general-purpose aviation [1] are in operation in the world.
The role of military aviation is constantly growing. Aviation is widely used for
border, police, customs and other types of public service. Aviation is extremely
important in extinguishing forest fires and eliminating the consequences of disasters.
Experimental aviation is used to conduct development, experimental, research and
development works, as well as to test aviation and other equipment.
The most important role in ensuring the flight of modern aircraft in civil avia-
tion (military aircraft in state aviation) is played by aviation equipment (avionics).
Progress in the field of avionics largely determines the development of aviation. The
saturation of the Armed Forces with various equipment continuously increases, its
cost increases.
The term “avionics” was firmly established in publications related to aviation,
although it did not acquire interpretations in domestic regulatory documents. In the
reference book of the Air Transport Association [2], avionics refers to the field of
technical sciences related to the development, production and operation of aviation
electronic and automatic equipment. In the guidelines of the International Civil Avia-
tion Organization (ICAO) [3], avionics is called airborne electronic equipment, that
is, any electronic device, including its electrical part, intended for use on board an
aircraft.
Since the electronic equipment providing aviation aviation is located both on board
the aircraft, and on Earth and even in space, we will further understand avionics as
avionics, distinguishing between ground-based (space) and airborne avionics.
In practice, the scope of the concept of “avionics” does not cover all aviation
equipment and changes with the development of technology. In the work [4], avionics
v
vi Introduction
in the narrow sense (according to the terminology [3]) of modern aircraft are divided
into five groups:
1. Flight-navigation equipment, which includes:
• Flight Management System (FMS), Aircraft Flight Control System (FCS),
Aircraft Thrust Management System, Stability Augmentation System (SAS);
• Flight Warning System;
• Ground Proximity Warning Systems (GPWS);
• Cockpit Display System (CDS);
• Inertial Reference Systems (IRS);
• Air Data Systems (ADS);
• Sensors of the primary flight information;
• Standby gauges and position and vertical indicators;
• Standby aneroid-membrane devices;
• Digital Watch;
2. Radar and radio navigation equipment, which includes:

• Short-Range Navigation System (SHORAN), Long-Range Navigation System
(LORAN), Satellite Radio Navigation Systems (SRNS), Instrumental Landing
Systems;
• Weather radar (Wxr);
• Distance Measurement Equipment (DME);
• Radio altimeters;
• Automatic Direction Finder (ADF);
• Airborne transponders of Secondary Surveillance Radar (SSR);
• Airborne Collision Avoidance Systems (ACAS);
• integrated radio equipment consoles;
3. Communication equipment, which includes:

• airborne equipment of radio communication systems;
• airborne equipment of automatic data exchange systems with the Earth;
• equipment of identification “friend or foe” (IFF);
• aircraft negotiation systems;
• audiovisual systems;
4. Equipment for signaling and displaying information on the operation of aircraft

systems, which includes:
• integrated alarm information systems;
• preventive alarm systems;
5. Equipment control and registration, which includes:

• airborne systems and means of control;
• magnetic means of recording parameters;
Introduction vii
• voice recorders.
All of the above constitutes the scope of the term “airborne equipment complex”,
introduced in [5].
As indicated in [4], the question of the inclusion in the avionics of electronic
systems of general aircraft equipment—control systems of rudders, wing mecha-
nization, stabilizer, powerplant, fuel, oil, hydraulics, pneumatics, air conditioning,
power supply, lighting and etc. All these systems are proposed to be conventionally
considered electric systems of the aircraft.
General airborne equipment is not considered in this book. Also, the means that
ensure the comfort of passengers’ stay aboard the aircraft are not considered, and the
means of ensuring the safety of passengers, as the dynamics of their development,
design approaches and problems in this area differ significantly from the development
and problems of the rest of avionics.
The military and other state-owned aircraft also include various electronic means
to ensure that aircraft perform their missions.
The last decades are characterized by two global trends in the development of
airborne avionics:
1. avionics modernization on the operated aircraft;
2. the creation of avionics for new aircraft.
The need to modernize aviation technology and, in particular, avionics, is caused
by two reasons. Firstly, there is a discrepancy between the long life cycle of the aircraft
and the high speed of technological progress in related industries: aircraft instrument
engineering, engine construction, development and production of armaments. As an
example, suffice it to say that the performance of computing tools developed in the
world doubles every 18 months, with the result that many of the avionics systems
developed become obsolete before they begin to operate.
Secondly, modernization in military aviation is associated with a change in the
geopolitical situation and plans of governments of various countries, and modern-
ization in civil aviation is associated with the policy of international, regional, and
national civil aviation authorities and with commercial airline policies. Examples
include:
• modernization of the fleet of strategic bombers of the US Air Force, associated
with the collapse of the USSR and the reorientation to participate in regional
conflicts [6];
• the activities of various companies on the modernization of aircraft equipment
in accordance with the introduction of restrictions on flights on international
airlines (reducing the grid spacing of communication radio stations from 25 kHz
to 8.33 kHz, providing immunity-theta airborne navigation and landing equipment
to the operation of VHF broadcasting stations range, ensuring noise immunity and
scanning of DME airborne equipment, improving the algorithms of the airborne
systems to prevent collisions of airplanes in the air and early warning of proximity
Land et al.) [7].
viii Introduction
The end of the Cold War has had a great influence on the plans for the modern-
ization and creation of new military aircraft. In all countries creating aircraft, except
India and China, military budgets were sharply reduced [8].
The creation of avionics for new aircraft, occurring against the background of
the above-mentioned political and economic processes, occurs in the context of
expanding the range of aircraft tasks, complicating the crew’s work, increasing the
range of aviation equipment, and participating in the creation of airborne avionics of
many manufacturers.
There are three main directions in the development of new types of technologies
that significantly affect the processes of creation and commissioning of airborne
avionics [9]. The first direction is the introduction of the achievements of micro-
electronics, computer technology and new materials. Modern microelectronics
makes it possible to implement almost any circuit solutions. Improving the speed
of computational tools, increasing the memory capacity, high-speed data transfer
methods contribute to the implementation of modern methods of optimal signal
and data processing, including through the integration of information from various
airborne sensors.
The second direction of development of new technologies is associated with the
improvement of existing traditional systems and the creation of new ones, comple-
menting each other and expanding the possibility of flying in different weather condi-
tions at any point on the globe. Until recently, local air traffic management (ATM)
systems, communications, navigation and surveillance were limited to solving the
problems of improving the safety and efficiency of aviation in a number of airspace
areas, especially over the ocean, deserts, mountainous areas and other difficult access
local areas where the deployment of local ground systems is either not possible or
economically unprofitable.
A new direction of development of avionics in civil aviation is defined by the
concept of a complex of communications, navigation and surveillance for air traffic
management (Communications, Navigation and Surveillance/Air Traffic Manage-
ment—CNS/ATM), developed and implemented by ICAO. This concept envisages
a number of fundamental changes that will be developed throughout the entire plan-
ning period (up to 2025 and beyond) and will serve as a common basis for guiding the
implementation of ATM systems. The core of the CNS/ATM concept and systems is
the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS), standardized by ICAO and designed
to become a worldwide location and time determination system. Currently, GNSS
is supported by the constellations of the two GPS and GLONASS satellite systems.
After the creation of the European system GALILEO, GNSS will be able to work in
three constellations.
At the same time, ICAO developed the concept of area navigation (RNAV) and
the required navigation characteristics of RNP (accuracy, integrity, continuity of
service and readiness) [10, 11], as well as the concept of navigation based on PBN
characteristics [12].
The required characteristics of accuracy, integrity, continuity and readiness can
be ensured by creating a single navigation field at the world or regional (national)
scale [13, 14]. However, difficulties of an economic, political and organizational
Introduction ix
nature impede the realization of this idea in the foreseeable future. Therefore, the
development and implementation of systems that complement GNSS are currently
recognized as one of the main areas of RNP support. ICAO has developed standards
for GNSS functional augmentation systems, which are divided into three types:
aviation (ABAS), terrestrial (GBAS and GRAS), and satellite (SBAS). The task of
the aircraft avionics developers is the implementation of the airborne avionics work
with these systems of the GNSS functional supplement.
For a number of decades and up to the present time, radio-navigation systems
(RNS) that have been widely used have been terrestrial radio beacon RNS. However,
their further application does not allow to meet the increasing requirements for avia-
tion navigation support in terms of accuracy [15]. With the introduction of GNSS, it
became possible to meet the requirements for accuracy, but this system has problems
in meeting the requirements for availability, integrity and continuity of service [16].
It can be stated that currently none of the existing RNS separately satisfies all the
requirements of the RNP [15].
In these conditions, the decisive role is played by the third main direction in the
development of new technologies—the creation of new principles for the organi-
zation and interaction of various communication, navigation and surveillance
systems. This refers to the use of multifunctional integrated airborne equipment:
computing facilities, radio-electronic means, means of transmitting and displaying
information, etc. The trend towards integration is also observed in other types of
airborne avionics.
Pursuing the goal of integrated solution of the tasks of navigation, set-up, commu-
nication, identification, electronic warfare and weapon control, in the USA in the
1980s and 1990s, numerous studies were conducted on the development of mili-
tary avionics development programs Pave Pillar, Pave Pace, CSP, ICNIA, INEWS,
A3 , and others. Evaluating airborne avionics as a single technical area for combat
operations, the US Air Force Command identified integration of various means and
subsystems as the main direction of its development.
In civil aviation in the same years there was a process of spontaneous integration
of airborne avionics. It was expressed in the different companies’ production of
dozens of types of equipment for a specific consumer with partial or full hardware
integration of one or several functions. The desire to streamline integration activities
led to the development by ARINC of the concept of integrated modular avionics
(IMA).
At present, the process of integration of airborne avionics abroad is continuing
and expanding.
The above trends in the development of modern avionics are also reflected in the
Russian government programs. The concept of modernization and development of the
Unified Air Traffic Management System of the Russian Federation [17] approved
by the government of the Russian Federation determined that the development of
the Unified ATM System in the strategic plan is based on ICAO decisions on the
transition of all states to air traffic management CNS/ATM concepts. The Russian
concept contains the following principal provisions related to airborne avionics: a
x Introduction
common technical policy should be developed by ministries and departments to

maintain and develop EU ATM;
The new operating principles of advanced ATM systems, based on the communi-
cation of airborne, ground-based and space means into a single integrated network
using digital data lines, require linking with the projected unified integrated ATM
system of the European Region of ICAO, and later and with the world air navigation
system;
it is necessary to envisage the creation in the Russian Federation of the main
elements of the air navigation system—communication, navigation and surveillance
systems using both satellite and traditional technologies;
ICAO standards and recommendations should be implemented in the EU ATM.
At the same time, it is necessary to preserve those standards and recommenda-
tions currently in force in the Russian Federation that exceed ICAO standards and
recommendations in their requirements;
equipping aircraft of Russian airlines with airborne equipment should be made
taking into account the recommendations adopted by the European Civil Aviation
Commission and approved by ICAO, which define the requirements for airborne
equipment.
To implement the adopted concept in the Russian Federation, several federal target
programs (FTP) were approved, aimed at modernizing and updating civil aviation
and, in particular, creating a number of generations of digital integrated airborne
equipment.
The proposed book is devoted to the principles of integrated avionics. In accor-
dance with the meaning of the term “principle” (the beginning, basis, initial point
of knowledge), this work examines the initial facts, ideas that, according to the
authors, are or can be used as the basis for scientific and technical activities to create,
research and operation of such a complex technical system, which is integrated
airborne avionics. At the same time, principles relating both to the subject of activity
and to the activity process (airborne avionics integration) are considered.
The main focus of the book is on the integration of airborne electronic equipment
(avionics), to which we refer to airborne aviation equipment using radio waves.
With this definition, the avionics of the aircraft of the above include radar, radion-
avigational, radio communications airborne equipment, airborne equipment for data
exchange along the lines of “ground-to-air” and “air-to-air”. We will make a reserva-
tion that this definition is not generally accepted. Often, information display systems,
airborne computing facilities, data buses, and artificial intelligence systems are also
referred to as avionics.
At the same time, the book also analyzes the principles and concepts of integration
of airborne avionics as a whole. This is due to the common nature of a number of
airborne equipment integration principles.
An analysis of domestic and foreign studies on the integration of avionics, the
results of which are given in Chap. 2 of this book, showed that the greatest attention
is paid to the integration of airborne computing facilities [18, 19], aircraft control
systems [20], aviation weapons systems [21], airborne radar [22] and radio communi-
cation [23] equipment. Airborne radioelectronic equipment for navigation, landing,
Introduction xi
data exchange and air traffic control (ATC) systems is considered, as a rule, only as
information sensors. Clear ideas about the functional tasks, principles of organization
and functioning of the integrated avionics of these systems are practically absent.
Therefore, special attention in the book is given to this particular equipment.
When writing a book, the authors pursued several goals. First of all, there is a
need to summarize the various points of view of specialists in integration problems,
the results of the development of concepts and the implementation of avionics inte-
gration programs. The second goal of writing the book is to set forth the principles
of integrated avionics of navigation, landing, data exchange and air traffic control,
corresponding to modern ideas about the integration of airborne avionics and the
prospects for the development of aviation.
The third, but no less important goal is to give young professionals who begin
their technical activities in the field of development of airborne equipment a book
that could serve as an introduction to the integration of airborne avionics.
The authors deliberately sought to attract, without undue detail, perhaps more
materials on this subject. As a result, the work is, in many respects, an overview.
This deficiency can be replenished by the reader by referring to the cited sources or
by independently solving specific problems of the integration of airborne equipment.
Chapter 1 of the book, the features of the avionics avionics navigation, landing,
data exchange and ATC as an integral part of the avionics systems and systems are
analyzed.
Chapter 2, the concepts and programs for creating integrated airborne avionics
in the USA, NATO, the IMA concept of ARINC and RTCA, domestic concepts of
integrated airborne equipment are considered.
Chapter 3 proposes criteria for the selection of functional tasks of integrated
avionics and substantiates the composition of the functional tasks of integrated
avionics of navigation, landing, data exchange and air traffic control for prospective
Russian aircraft.
Chapter 4 is devoted to the development of the principles of hardware integration
of avionics as a distributed information processing system.
Chapter 5 describes the main functions of the integrated avionics of navigation,
landing, data exchange and air traffic control, defined by standards and other regula-
tory documents of the systems in which this equipment should operate. A description
is also given of the basic algorithms that ensure the execution of these functions.
Chapter 6 is devoted to the issues of joint processing of information in airborne
avionics (functional integration). The presentation of the material in this chapter
is, in many respects, methodological in nature. The goal is to describe the main
approaches to information processing in the airborne flight and navigation complex
and, in particular, in the avionics, in a relatively small volume and in the form
accessible to a wide range of readers, and in particular consistency and interaction
of individual theoretical directions related to this topic, to acquaint readers with the
terminology and literature. The joint processing of radionavigation information as
the most interesting for the authors in their production activity was subjected to a
more specific consideration.
xii Introduction
Chapter 7 provides examples of the implementation of airborne integrated avionics

in civil and military aviation.
Considering that this book is, apparently, the first national monograph specifically
devoted to the problems of integration of airborne avionics, the authors understand
that it is not flawed, and are ready to accept any comments and suggestions on its
content.
The authors are grateful to the Honored Worker of Science and Technology of
the Russian Federation, Doctor of Technical Sciences, Prof. P. V. Olyanyuk for their
constant attention to the work of the authors on the book and valuable comments.
The authors are grateful to their colleagues for the many and useful conversations
and discussions on the issues discussed in the book.
The first edition of the book was published in 2005.
This second edition has been revised and supplemented by authors in the light of
materials published after the first edition.
References
1. Olyanyuk PV (2002) Vozdushnyj transport v sovremennom mire. – SPb: «Galeya Print»,

291s
2. Air Transport Association Handbook (1990)
3. «Opredeleniya terminov IKAO, ispol’zuemyh v Konvencii o mezhduna-rodnoj grazhdan-
skoj aviacii, Prilozheniyah k nej, a takzhe Pravilah aeronavigacionnogo obsluzhivaniya».
Dos.9569 (1991)
4. Kuznecov SV (1998) Analiz struktury sovremennyh kompleksov i sistem avioniki
vozdushnyh sudov grazhdanskoj aviacii. Nauch. vestnik MGTU GA. Ser. Avionika, №3,
S.6–25
5. GOST 18977-79 «Kompleksy bortovogo oborudovaniya samoletov i ver-toletov. Tipy
funkcional’nyh svyazej. Vidy i urovni elektricheskih signalov».
6. Modernizaciya parka strategicheskih bombardirovshchikov VVS SSHA v nositeli
obychnogo oruzhiya. NTI. Ser. Aviac. sistemy /NIC Gos NIIAS, №11-12, S.10–13 (1994).
7. Osnovnye napravleniya razvitiya bortovogo radioelektronnogo oboru-dovaniya
passazhirskih samoletov. NTI. Ser. Aviac. sistemy /NIC Gos NIIAS, №11-12, S.18–
27 (1994)
8. Programmy sozdaniya bortovogo elektronnogo oborudovaniya aviacion-nyh boevyh
kompleksov. NTI. Ser. Aviac. sistemy /NIC GosNIIAS, №2, S.8–17 (1995)
9. Gromov GN, ZHiharev VP (1988) Vybor novyh vidov tekhnologij dlya radio-elektronnogo
aviacionnogo oborudovaniya. Voprosy radioelektroni-ki. Ser.OVR., Vyp.8, S.68–73 (1998)
10. «Rukovodstvo po trebuemym navigacionnym harakteristikam (RNP)». Doc/9613 AN/937.
ICAO, izd.2 (1999)
11. Report of the Special Communication/Operations Divisional Meeting. Doc.9650, ICAO
(1995)
12. «Rukovodstvo po navigacii, osnovannoj na harakteristikah (PBN)». Doc/9613 – AN/937. –
ICAO, izd. 3 (2008)
13. Formirovanie i primenenie integral’nogo radionavigacionnogo po-lya/Argunov AD,
Malyukov SN, Matyushenko AD i dr. Radiotekhnika, №9, S.31–36 (1998)
14. Malyukov SN (2001) Integral’naya radionavigacionnaya sistema. Osnovy i problemy
funkcionirovaniya. Sb. dokladov IV Ross. nauch.-tekhn. konf-cii «Sovremennoe sostoyanie,
problemy navigacii i okeanografii» («NO-2001»), 6–9 iyunya 2001g, Tom 1, SPb.
15. Denisov VI (1996) Perspektivy razvitiya i ispol’zovaniya radionavigaci-onnyh sistem.
Radiotekhnika №1, S.53–57
Introduction xiii
16. Solov’ev YUA (2000) Sistemy sputnikovoj navigacii. M.: Eko-Trendz

17. «Koncepciya modernizacii i razvitiya Edinoj sistemy organizacii vozdushnogo dvizheniya
Rossijskoj Federacii». Utv. Postanovleniem Pravitel’stva RF ot 22.02.2000g. №144
18. Pavlov AM (2001) Principy organizacii bortovyh vychislitel’nyh sistem perspektivnyh
letatel’nyh apparatov. Mir komp’yuternoj avtomati-zacii, №4, S.25–35
19. Arhitektura vychislitel’nyh sistem dlya integrirovannoj modul’noj avioniki perspektivnyh
letatel’nyh apparatov. In: Turchak AA, Chernyshov EE, Mihajluca KT, Shejnin YUE
(eds) Radiosistemy. Radioelektronnye kompleksy, №2, S.87–95 (ZHurnal v zhurnale
«Radiotekhnika». – 2002. - №9)
20. Kofman MM, Suslov VD, Surov BI, SHek-Iovsepyanc RA (1999) Osnovnye tradicionnye
i netradicionnye zadachi kompleksirovaniya bortovogo oborudovaniya letatel’nyh ob"ektov
Mir avioniki, №6, S.30–33
21. Buravlev AI, Krasnov AM, Moiseev AG, Pasekunov IV (1996) Osnovy kon-cepcii
postroeniya integrirovannyh interaktivnyh kompleksov avia-cionnogo vooruzheniya //Radio-
sistemy. Integrirovannye kompleksy i sistemy, vyp.17, S.70–74. (ZHurnal v zhurnale
«Radiotekhnika».-1996.-№9)
22. Bajbara VP (1996) Upravlenie algoritmicheskim obespecheniem radioloka-cionnogo
kanala aviacionnyh kompleksov bortovogo oborudovaniya. Radiosistemy. Integrirovannye
kompleksy i sistemy, vyp.17, S.90–95. (ZHurnal v zhurnale «Radiotekhnika». 1996. №9)
23. Belousov EL, Vojtkevich KL, Palochkin YUP (2000) Aviacionnaya radiosvyaz’ segodnya:
tendencii i nauchno tekhnicheskie problemy sozdaniya. Mir avioniki, №3, S.42–44
Contents
1 Place of Aviation Airborne Radio-Electronic Equipment

in Composition of Complexes and Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 Aviation Avionics as Part of Avionics Complexes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Airborne Avionics as Part of Aircraft Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.2.1 Features of Avionics of Modern Military Aircraft . . . . . . . . 7
1.2.2 Features of Avionics Modern Main Aircraft . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
2 Concepts and Programs of Creation of Airborne Integrated
Avionics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
2.1 Concepts and Programs for Creating Military Airborne
Integrated Avionics in the USA and Western Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
2.1.1 Organization and Perspective Directions of US
Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
2.1.2 Military Integration Programs for Avionics
in the USA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
2.1.3 Requirements for Military Integrated Electronic
Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
2.1.4 Integrated Airborne Activity Avionics in Western
Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
2.2 The Concept of Integrated Modular Avionics ARINC
Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
2.2.1 Development Goals and Integration Tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
2.2.2 IMA Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
2.2.3 System Components and Main Functional IMA
Modules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
2.2.4 Backplane Bus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
2.2.5 Control and Maintenance Bus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
2.2.6 Flight Data Buses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
2.2.7 Devices Compatible with ARINC 629 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
2.2.8 Simple Appliances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
2.2.9 Display Devices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
xv
xvi Contents
2.2.10 Remote Data Hubs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

2.2.11 RF Converters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
2.2.12 Speech Functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
2.2.13 IMA Architecture Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
2.2.14 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
2.3 IMA RTCA Concept . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
2.4 Concepts of Integrated Aviation Equipment in the USSR
and the Russian Federation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
3 Functional Tasks of Integrated Airborne Avionics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
3.1 Criteria for the Selection of Functional Tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
3.2 Justification of the Choice of Functional Tasks of Modern
Integrated Avionics for Promising Civil Aircraft and Military
Aircraft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
3.2.1 The Concept of ICAO Complex of Communications,
Navigation and Surveillance for Air Traffic
Management (CNS/ATM) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
3.2.2 The Concept of Zone Navigation and the Required
Navigation Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
3.2.3 ATN Networking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
3.2.4 Satellite Radio Navigation Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
3.2.5 Short-Range Radio Navigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
3.2.6 Digital Data Transmission Line at RSBN Frequencies . . . . 124
3.2.7 Flight Management Computer System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
3.2.8 Ground Proximity Warning System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
3.2.9 Instrumental Approach and Landing Systems . . . . . . . . . . . 131
3.2.10 Interaircraft Navigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
3.2.11 ATN Digital Data Lines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
3.2.12 Automatic Dependent Surveillance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
3.2.13 ATC Transponder, Airborne Collision Avoidance
System and Other Airborne Radar Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . 145
3.2.14 Integration of Surveillance Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
3.2.15 The Implementation of the Concept of CNS/ATM
in Military Aviation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
3.3 Architecture and Main Characteristics of CNS/ATM Airborne
Equipment in ARINC Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
3.3.1 Basic ARINC Documents Defining Functional Tasks
and CNS/ATM Airborne Equipment Architecture . . . . . . . . 150
3.3.2 CNS/ATM Airborne Avionics Concept in ARINC
660A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
3.3.3 GNSS Navigation Device Corresponding
to the ARINC 760-1 Characteristic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161
3.3.4 Multimode MMR Landing Receiver, Corresponding
to ARINC 755 Characteristic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
Contents xvii
3.3.5Advanced Flight Management Computer System

FMCS, Corresponding to the Characteristics
of ARINC702A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
3.3.6 GNSS Navigation and Landing Unit Corresponding
to ARINC 756 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
3.4 The Composition of the Functional Tasks of the Modern
Integrated Avionics of Navigation, Landing, Data Exchange
and ATC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170
4 Principles of Integration of Airborne Radio-Electronic
Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
4.1 Airborne Radio-Electronic Equipment as a Distributed
Information Processing System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
4.2 Multi-level Models of Integrated Avionics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
4.3 Typical Topological Structures of Hardware-Integrated
Avionics of Navigation, Landing, Data Exchange and Air
Traffic Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
4.4 The Structure and Functions of the Software of the MCS
of a Fully Integrated Avionics of Navigation, Landing, Data
Exchange and ATC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214
5 Functions of the Integrated Airborne Equipment Navigation,
Landing, Data Exchange and ATC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
5.1 ILS/MB Signal Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220
5.1.1 ILS Instrument Landing System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220
5.1.2 Glide Slope Beacon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
5.1.3 Marker Beacons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224
5.2 VOR Signal Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
5.3 Shaping and Processing of DME Signals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
5.3.1 DME Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
5.3.2 DME Signal Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228
5.3.3 Identification of DME Transponders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
5.4 MLS Signal Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232
5.5 Formation and Signal Processing RSBN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236
5.5.1 RSBN-Type Short-Range Radio Navigation System . . . . . . 236
5.5.2 RSBN Signals Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237
5.6 Shaping and Processing of Signals PRMG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239
5.7 Shaping and Processing of Signals in the Modes
“Rendezvous” and MCD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240
5.8 Shaping and Processing Signals of the ATC Transponder . . . . . . . . . 242
5.8.1 Secondary Surveillance Radar (SSR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242
5.8.2 SSR Data and Signal Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244
5.9 VDB Signal Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247
xviii Contents
6 Joint Processing of Information in Integrated Airborne Radio

Electronic Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249
6.1 Modern Theoretical Approaches to Information Processing
in the Airborne Flight-Navigation Complex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249
6.2 Functional Structure of the Unit for Processing Radio
Navigation Signals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277
6.2.1 Formulation of the Synthesis Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277
6.2.2 A Recurrent Algorithm for Transforming a Posteriori
Probability Density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281
6.2.3 The Recurrent Algorithm of the APM-Estimation
with the Poly-Gaussian Approximation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284
6.2.4 Connection of the STM Functional Structure
with the Theory of Quasilinear Filtering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289
6.2.5 Features of the Implementation of the Functional
Structure of STM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293
6.2.6 Quasilinear APM-Estimation Algorithm
with Nonlinear Dependence of Informative Signal
Parameters on Navigation Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298
6.2.7 Minimax Recurrent Linear Estimation Algorithm . . . . . . . . 301
6.2.8 Robust Estimation of the Parameters of Radio
Navigation Signals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303
6.3 Functional Structure of Airborne Data Signal Processing
Devices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 312
6.4 Principles of Complexing of Navigation Meters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 314
6.5 Multichannel Data Processing Radio Meters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 322
6.5.1 Multichannel Linear Estimation of Radio Data . . . . . . . . . . 322
6.5.2 Multichannel Quasilinear Estimation of Radio Data . . . . . . 331
6.6 Application of Adaptive Estimation Methods for Navigation
Data Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333
6.6.1 Correlation Algorithms for Adaptive Estimation . . . . . . . . . 333
6.6.2 Adaptive Algorithm for Multichannel Linear
Estimation with “Compression” of Residuals . . . . . . . . . . . 338
6.7 Multichannel Processing of Radio Data with Possible Failures
in the Measurement Channels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341
6.7.1 Task Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341
6.7.2 Single-Channel Estimation of Navigation Parameters
When Measurement Noise Changes Abruptly . . . . . . . . . . . 344
6.7.3 Multichannel Linear Estimation of Navigation
Parameters with Abrupt Change in Measurement
Noise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 352
Parameters for Combined Failures in Measurement
Channels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 356
Contents xix
6.7.5Multichannel Nonlinear Estimation of Navigation

Parameters in Case of Combined Failures
in Measurement Channels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 362
6.7.6 Algorithm for Generating Failure Signals
in a Multichannel Radio Data Processing System . . . . . . . . 365
6.8 The Structure of CPI Integrated Avionics Algorithms
with Detection and Localization of Hardware and Information
Failures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 371
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 378
7 Examples of Realization of Integrated Avionics of Navigation,
Landing, Data Exchange and ATC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 385
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 393
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 395
Abbreviations
A3 Advanced avionics architecture

AAC Aeronautical administrative communications
ABAS Aircraft based augmentation system
AC Aiming complex
ACAS Automatic collision avoidance system
ACP Armament control panel
ACS Automatic control system
ADAC Airborne digital aircraft computer
ADC Airborne digital computer
ADS Air data system
ADS-A Automatic Dependent Surveillance Addressed
ADS-B Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast
ADS-C Automatic Dependent Surveillance Contract
ADU Amplifying—distribution unit
AEEC Airlines electronic engineering committee
AFCS Automatic flight control system
AFU Antenna—feeder unit
AI Aeronautical information
AM Associative memory
AM(R)S Aeronautical mobile (route) service
AME Armaments and military equipment
AMEC Asymptotic matrix of estimation covariation
AMSS Aeronautical mobile satellite service
ANP Actual navigation performance
ANRM Autonomous non-radiotechnical meters
AOC Airline operational control
APC Aeronautical public correspondence
APD A posteriori probability distribution density
APM A posteriori probability maximum
APM Aircraft personification module
APP Armament preparation panel
APV Approach and landing operation with vertical guidance
xxi
xxii Abbreviations
AR Analog receiver
ARINC Aeronautical radio incorporated
AS Azimuth signal
ASAAC Allied standard avionics architecture council
ASCB Avionics standard communications bus
ATC Air traffic control
ATF Advanced tactical fighter
ATFM Air traffic flow management
ATFS Airborne time and frequency standard
ATM Air traffic management
ATN Aeronautical telecommunications network
ATS Air traffic service
AVPAC Aviation packed
B Bitwise
BA Barometric altimeter
BC Basic complex
BCS Bollard control system
BIM Block international modes
BLG Beacon landing group
BMT Built—in monitoring tools
BRM Block of Russian modes
B-RNAV Basic area navigation
BWC Block of weight coefficients
CC Channel-to-channel
CCC Communication and control complex
CD Control device
CDD-IC Coding-decoding device of international codes
CDD-RC Coding-decoding device of Russian codes
CDTI Cockpit display of traffic information
CDU Control display unit
CE Consumer equipment
CENS Correlation-extreme navigation system
CIP Complex information processing
CM Command memory
CMU Communications management unit
CNS Complex navigation system
COM Commutator
Conv. Converter
CPDLC Controller–pilot data link communications
CPI Complex processing of information
CPP Communication between processors
CRTS Complex radiotechnical system
CS Computer system
CS Course system
CSA Cumulative sum algorithms
Abbreviations xxiii
CSP Common signal processor

CTB Communication through buses
CU Computer unit
CU Control unit
CWS Communication with a switch
DAIS Digital avionics information system
DC Defense complex
DC Deviation coefficient
DCC Dialog computing complex
DCMS Display control and monitoring system
DCS Distributed computing system
DDL Digital data link
DDM Difference in depth of modulation
DGNSS Differential gnss
DGPS Differential gps
DIPS Distributed information processing system
DLS Data link service
DM Data memory
DME Distance measuring equipment
DP Data processor
DR Digital receiver
DR Directional
DSDM Doppler speed and drift meters
DSP Digital signal processor
EDS Electronic display system
EGNOS European geostationary navigation overlay system
EPEW Earth proximity early warning
ES Extended squitter
EW Electronic warfare
FAA Federal aviation administration
FANS Future air navigation system
FC Flight complex
FCC Flight control computer
FCM Functional-constructive module
FCS Flight control system
FIS Flight information service
FLR Functional of likelihood ratio
FMC Flight management computer
FMCS Flight management computer system
FMS Flight management system
FNC Flight-navigation complex
FOP Function—oriented processor
GBAS Ground-based augmentation system
GLS Gnss landing system
GNLU Gnss navigation landing unit
xxiv Abbreviations
GNSS Global navigation satellite system

GNU Gnss navigation unit
GPS Global positioning system
GPWS Ground proximity warning system
GRAS Ground region augmentation system
HC High connectivity
HF (VHF) High frequency (very high frequency)
HFU HF unit
HSDB High-speed digital bus
IBC Integrated basic complex
ICE Integrated computing environment
ICNIA Integrated communication navigation identification avionics
IFF Identification “friend-or-foe”
IIO Information interaction objects
ILS Instrument landing system
IMS Information-management system
IOP Input/output processor
IPU Information processing unit
IREC Integrated Radio Equipment Consoles
IRS Inertial reference system
IS Identification system
ISO International standard organization
IUSDN Interfacing unit of the signal distribution network
JIAP Joint integrated avionics plan
JIAWG Joint integrated avionics working group
JSF Joint strike fighter
LAAS Local area augmentation system
LC Landing complex
LC Low connectivity
LCC Life-cycle cost
LCN Local computer network
LME Link management entity
LORAN Long range air navigation system
LR Likelihood ratio
LRM Line replaceable module
LRU Line replaceable unit
LSM Least-squares method
MAMS Multilevel adaptive management system
MASPS Minimum aviation system performance standards
MB Marker beacon
MB Multiplexed bus
MC Multiple command
MCD Mutual coordinate determination
MCDU Multipurpose control display unit
MCS Measuring and computing subsystem
Abbreviations xxv
MCS Multilevel communication system

MD Multiple data
MDS Maintenance diagnostics system
MDS Multilevel defense system
MFD Multifunction display
MIES Multilevel information exchange system
MIS Multilevel information system
ML Maximum likelihood
MLS Microwave landing system
MMR Multimode receiver
MOPS Minimum operational performance specifications
MSAS Multifunctional satellite-based augmentation system
MSDF Multi-sensor data fusion
MTE Markov theory of estimation
MWCS Multilevel weapons control system
NC Narrow channel
NC Navigation complex
NS Navigation satellite
NS Navigation system
OAES Operational advising expert system
OC On-board computer
OCBC On-board computer of basic complex
OCS On-board computer system
ODC Onboard digital computer
OIP Off-season indication pulses
OR Omnidirectional
OSI Open system interconnection
PAA Phased array antenna
PDME Precision dme
PFD Primary flight display
PIP Primary information processing
PM Primary meter
pr. Preset
PRC Probability of right correction
PRP Probability of right prohibition of correct
PS Protective space
PSC Probability of skipping the correction
PVT Position, velocity, time
R Receiver
RA Radio altimeter
RBS Radar beacon system
REC Radio electronic complex
RFC Probability of false correction
RNAV Area navigation
RND Radio navigation devices
xxvi Abbreviations
RNP Required navigation performance

RNS Radio navigation system
RP Radiation pattern
RS Radio station
RTC Radio technical complex
RTCA Radio technical commission for aeronautics
RTG Radio technical glide path
RTS Radiotechnical system
SARPs Standards and recommended practices icao
SBAS Satellite based augmentation system
SC Single command
SCNS Small complex navigation system
SD Single data
SEF Smoothing and extrapolation filter
SEM Standard electronic module
SEMA Single executive/multiple applications
SESA Single executive/single application
SHORAN Short-range navigation
SIP Secondary information processing
SRNS Satellite radio navigation system
SS Shared storage
SSP Signal shaping processor
STM Search and tracking meter
T Transmitter
TACAN Tactical air navigation
TAWS Terrain avoidance warning system
TCS Thrust control system
TFS Time and frequence standard
THMS Theory of hierarchical multilevel systems
TIS Traffic information services
UMP Uniformly most powerful
UTC Universal coordinated time
VC Vertical course
VDA Violation detection algorithm
VDB Vhf data link—broadcast
VDL Vhf data link
VLSI Very large—scale integration
VOR Vhf omnidirectional radio range
W Word by word
WAAS Wide area augmentation system
WC Wide channel
WGS-84 World geodetic system—1984
WRP Warning of premature reduction
WXR Weather radar
Chapter 1
Place of Aviation Airborne
Radio-Electronic Equipment
in Composition of Complexes
and Systems
1.1 Aviation Avionics as Part of Avionics Complexes
The system approach to the analysis and design of airborne avionics is associated with
the formation of ideas about it as a subsystem of other, more extensive systems, such
as radiotechnical complexes (RTCs). Radio engineering complexes can be classified
according to the following features (Fig. 1.1) [1]:
• information interaction objects (IIO) type;
• the relative level of complexity of the objects of IIO and RTC;
• the nature of information interaction between RTC and objects;
• purpose of the RTC and its subsystems;
• hierarchy levels of the RTC;
• structure and element base of the RTC.
In this classification, the objects of information interaction are understood
as systems of any origin, scale and complexity, capable of radiating, reflecting,
absorbing or dissipating electromagnetic oscillations. The radio engineering complex
is considered as an object of the highest degree of complexity among the existing
technical systems that use radio waves. It can be attributed to targeted multi-level
systems. “This means that the complex itself and any of its subsystems have a clearly
defined functional purpose (purpose of functioning), which can be expressed in the
language of a certain hierarchical level” [1].
Aviation radio-electronic equipment (avionics) of civil aviation in the framework
of this classification can be considered as the radio engineering complex of the
organization of air traffic (RTC ATM). In terms of targets, this complex is at the
highest level of the hierarchy and is characterized as a large system, the global goal
of which is the timely execution of air transportation and cargo delivery by the
available number of airplanes and helicopters in a given area of airspace, taking into
account the requirements, regularity and efficiency of air traffic.
ATM RTC performs several target tasks, and from this point of view, it is divided
into complex radiotechnical systems (CRTS), which constitute the second level of
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021 1
I. V. Avtin et al., Principles of Integrated Airborne Avionics, Springer Aerospace
Technology, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-0897-1_1
2 1 Place of Aviation Airborne Radio-Electronic Equipment …
Natural Manufactured Sources of information Information consumers
Earth Objects of Information Interaction (OII) Relative RTC<OII

level of diffi-
information interaction
culty of OII RTC≈OII
and RTC
Organization of
Seas and
oceans RTC>OII
Location of
OII and RTC
Airspace Conformed
Type of in-
formation Indifferent
interaction
Space Radio technical complexes
Antagonistic
Special purpose Hierarchy level Structure Elemental base
Information exchange Radio technical complex Centralized Analog
Navigation support Complex radio technical system Decentralized Discrete
Information extraction Starry

Radio technical system (RTS)
Function management of infor- Circular
mation interaction objects RTS subsystem
Information interaction interruption Radio technical equipment
Fig. 1.1 Classification of radio systems
the hierarchy. The CRTS is understood to be a set of radiotechnical equipment of

the same purpose, jointly solving one of the target tasks of the RTC. For ATM at all
stages of navigation, use the following main CRTS [2]:
• navigation support (CRTS NS);
• air traffic control (CRTS ATC);
• aeronautical information (CRTS AI);
• meteorological support.
In turn, for example, several types of radiotechnical systems (RTS)—radio navi-
gation (RNS), radar and radio communications can be included in the CRTS NS.
For example, CRTS are included as the third level of the hierarchy, RNS including
ground-based and airborne equipment (in the case of satellite RNS—and equipment
of spacecraft), either only airborne equipment or only ground-based equipment. The
main RNS, which can be part of the modern RTC ATM, is described, for example,
in [3].
Airborne electronic equipment (avionics) of the civilian aircraft can either enter
as a subsystem in the corresponding RTS or exist as an independent autonomous RTS
[e.g., Doppler speed and drift meters (DSDM), radio altimeter (RA), weather radar
(WXR)]. In particular, the avionics of navigation and landing is part of the CRTS
NS and the transponders of the ATC may be assigned to the CRTS ATC.
Aviation radio-electronic equipment in military aviation during flights in the area
of responsibility of the civil service of the ATM interacts with ground systems of the
RTC ATM and when flying around military aerodromes with military complexes of
the aerodrome service. The typical composition of a stationary or mobile military
airfield complex includes a command-dispatch center, a liaison command center, a
1.1 Aviation Avionics as Part of Avionics Complexes 3
radar landing system, a long range and a near driving radio beacons, SHORAN radio
beacons and a landing beacon group of the decimeter landing system, radiocommu-
nication HF and VHF stations, means of secret communication, light equipment, etc.
In general, the structure of these complexes can also be divided into complex RTS,
similar to the CRTS civilian airports.
Consider the differences that exist between the types of avionics in terms of the
nature of the information interaction between it and the objects of information inter-
action. In the above classification (Fig. 1.1), three types of information interaction
are identified: consistent, indifferent and antagonistic. At the same time, avionics can
be divided by the nature of the impact on the performance of information interaction
objects on cooperating, indifferent and conflicting [4].
Consistent information interaction implies the unity of the goals and objectives of
the operation of the avionics and information interaction objects, as well as the pres-
ence of sufficiently complete a priori information about the conditions, parameters
and characteristics of information interaction (form and parameters of signals, types
of modulation and coding, information exchange protocols, location (coordinates) of
information interaction objects). Here, the CRTS subsystems (radio beacons, ground-
based radio stations, secondary radars, RNS spacecraft, etc.) are often used as objects
of information interaction. A characteristic feature of the coordinated information
interaction is the activity of the information interaction object (the presence of a
radio transmitting device on it). In some cases, a receiving device is also installed at
the information interaction facility to establish a two-way interaction.
The airborne radio-electronic equipment of consistent information interaction
includes all avionics of navigation, landing, communications, identification and
air traffic control, except for autonomous airborne RTS (DSDM, RA, WXR),
correlation-extreme navigation systems (CENS), etc.
An indifferent information interaction is typical for avionics that solve the problem
of extracting information about an object using primary active radar methods by radi-
ation and analyzing reflected signals or by using passive radar methods by analyzing
the object’s own radiation. In this case, objects of natural origin (meteorization, parts
of the earth and water surface) and objects of artificial origin (aircraft, missiles,
ground moving targets, etc.) act as information interaction objects. In the case of
indifferent interaction, the information interaction object remains passive and the
source of information is the contrast of the electromagnetic fields emitted by the
object and the environment.
The indifference of information interaction leads to a significant increase in a priori
uncertainty and complicates the processing of signals and the extraction of informa-
tion about an object from them. Signal processing methods may include object recog-
nition and identification, which require significantly larger computational resources
than signal processing methods with coordinated EI.
The airborne electronic equipment of indifferent information interaction can be
classified, in particular:
• airborne autonomous RTS (DSDM, RA, WXR), CENS, etc.);

• radar, providing following the relief and fly-around obstacles, including the
issuance of warning signals of collisions with the ground and obstacles;
• radar mapping area;
• radar detection and selection of moving ground targets.
Antagonistic information interaction is specific to air-defense systems for military
use. Such an interaction is characterized primarily by the antagonism of the objectives
of the RTC, which includes the avionics and the object of the information interaction,
as the latter enters the system that is in conflict with the highest level system that
determines the purpose of the RTC.
Informational interaction in the conditions of antagonistic conflict leads to an even
greater level of a priori uncertainty in the conditions of the functioning of avionics
since the adversary deliberately uses the entire arsenal of methods and means that
impede the operation of avionics. At the same time, the necessary resources for signal
and data processing, as well as the requirements for the efficiency of the tasks solved
by the avionics [5], increase sharply. The airborne avionics equipment of antagonistic
information interaction may, in particular, be attributed [6, 7]:
• airborne multifunctional pulse-Doppler radar, used, including, to control
weapons;
• optical and electronic systems of the visible and infrared range (target detection
and attack systems, laser illumination equipment, laser range finders, television
systems, etc.);
• radio intelligence systems, laser irradiation sensors, missile warning systems,
active jamming stations, radar warning stations;
• active and passive systems of the millimeter range, used to detect radiating
missiles, reconnaissance for combat and target designation, weapon control.
The required resources of computing facilities (performance, memory capacity)
of the selected avionics groups vary by tens and hundreds of times [8, 9].
The identical nature of information interaction makes it possible to single out the
following common property of avionics of navigation, landing, communication, data
exchange and air traffic control: This airborne equipment is, as a rule, simultaneously
an element of “its” radionavigation (radio communications, radar) systems, members
of the ATM RTC and an element of the airborne aviation radio-electronic complex
(REC). Information processes occurring in the avionics are subject to protocols,
standards, norms of both the one and the other large systems. A specific aviation
REC solves its specific tasks inherent in a specific aircraft, but at the same time,
the avionics that provide the solution to these tasks, functions in a certain sense
independently of these tasks.
1.2 Airborne Avionics as Part of Aircraft Equipment 5
1.2 Airborne Avionics as Part of Aircraft Equipment
The above classification shows the place of airborne avionics as part of avionics
complexes, providing air traffic control in civil aviation, and, in military aviation, in
addition, the solution of aircraft missions.
There is another classification that determines the hierarchy of aircraft equipment
[10, 11]. In accordance with it, the composition of the radio navigation aids includes:
• radio navigation devices (RND), which are autonomous airborne equipment;
• airborne equipment RNS;
• airborne equipment of complex navigation system (CNS).
A complex navigation system is a set of interrelated radio technical and non-radio
technical airborne and ground-based facilities with different principles of action,
designed to jointly measure navigation parameters (elements) when solving certain
navigation problems [10]. Examples of airborne equipment of the CNS can serve as
the avionics, which provide a comprehensive processing of the information of the
satellite radio navigation system (SRNS) GPS and other navigation systems [12].
On a specific aircraft, the airborne equipment of all three groups can be included
as information sensors in a flight-navigation complex (FNC), which also includes:
• non-radio navigation systems (INS, air data system (ADS), vertical course (VC),
course system (CS), barometric altimeter (BA), etc.);
• airborne computing systems, consisting of one or several airborne digital computer
(ADC);
• electronic display system (EDS);
• automatic control system (ACS);
• executive and control devices and systems (ru-left units, automatic thrust
mechanisms, aileron position sensors, etc.).
The allocation of the airborne equipment of the navigation complex (NC) and
the landing complex (LC) [9], carried out on the main tasks solved during the flight
stages, is also common. The combination of NC and LC coincides in this case with
FNC.
On civil aircraft, the FNC is the backbone of airborne avionics, which, like the
ATM RTC, can be considered a large system. On military aircraft, the leading role
in the airborne avionics is played by the airborne equipment of the weapon control
and defense of the aircraft.
The main avionics of navigation, landing, communications and air traffic control
of Russian aircraft and helicopters are presented in Table. 1.1.
Airborne equipment of the aeronautical radiocommunication systems, as a rule, is
not included in the FNC [10]. This equipment, which is also part of the aviation REC,
is either a self-contained single-function equipment (e.g., short-range and long-range
radio stations), or it is part of a complex communication system, which is not quite
correctly called a complex (TKS, BAKS, etc.).
Table 1.1 Main navigation, landing, communications and air traffic control avionics of domestic
aircraft and helicopters
Equipment naming Frequency range, MHz Calculated Note
polarization
Long-Range
Navigation Radio
System (LORAN)
Pulse-phase 0.01 Vertical
(Loran-C, Chayka,
Tropic 2)
Phase (Omega, 0.01–0.02 Vertical
Marshrut)
Automatic direction 0.115–1.8 Vertical
finder
HF radio station 2.0–30.0 Data and voice
transmission/reception
VHF radio station 30.0–79.975 Data and voice
Marker receiver 75.0 Horizontal
Receiver VOR/ILS 108.0–117.975 Horizontal Maximum digital data
(heading) output rate 30 Hz
VHF-radio station 100.0–149.975 Vertical Data and voice
UHF-radio station 220.0–399.975 Data and voice
Aerospace Radio 280.0–290.0 Data and voice
Communication (reception) transmission/reception
Equipment 345.0–385.0
(transmission)
ILS (glide-slope) 328.6–335.4 Horizontal Maximum digital data
receiver output rate 30 Hz
ATM transponder ( 740.0 (reception) Horizontal
837.5 (transmission)
LORAN equipment 770.0–812.3 Horizontal Maximum digital data
(transmission) output rate 1.66 Hz
873.6–1000.5
(reception)
Decimeter range 772.0–808.0 Horizontal Maximum digital data
landing system (transmission) output rate 16 Hz
equipment 905.1–935.2 (reception
of heading signals)
939.6–969.6 (reception
of glide-slope and
distance measurement
signals)
(continued)
Table 1.1 (continued)

Equipment naming Frequency range, MHz Calculated Note
polarization
Mutual coordinate 726.0–813.0 Horizontal
system equipment
DME interrogater 1025.0–1150.0 Vertical Maximum digital data
(transmission) output rate 16 Hz
962.0–1213.0
(reception)
ATC A, C, S mode 1030.0 (reception) Vertical
transponder 1090.0 (transmission)
Traffic collision 1030.0 (transmission) Vertical
avoidance system 1090.0 (reception)
equipment (TCAS
II)
GPS (C/A-code) 1575.42 (L1) Elliptical Maximum digital data
Reveiver output rate: navigation
5 Hz, landing 16 Hz
GLONASS receiver Elliptical Maximum digital data
C/A-code 1602.5625–1615.5 output rate: navigation
(since 2005 year: 5 Hz, landing 16 Hz
1598.0625–1604.25)
P-code 1246.4375–1256.5
1602.5625–1615.5
(since 2005 year:
1242.9375–1248.1875;
1598.0625–1604.25)
Transponder of 1500
recognition
equipment
Radio altimeter 4200–4400 Maximum digital data
output rate 5 Hz
MLS receiver 5031.0–5090.7 Vertical Maximum digital data
output rate 40 Hz
Doppler speed and 8800–9800 Maximum digital data
drift-angle meters 13,250–13,400 output rate 20 Hz
Weather radar 9305–9415 Horizontal/vertical
1.2.1 Features of Avionics of Modern Military Aircraft
Since the end of the 1980s, the multi-level hierarchical structure of avionics has been
the most common, combining the following advantages of centralized and distributed
structures:
• division into distinct functional subsystems with fairly simple interface charac-
teristics, to which minimum requirements can be set;
• easy implementation of procedures for the control of proper functioning;
• the possibility of parallel independent development and improvement of indi-
vidual subsystems without changing the overall structure;
• division of software (software) into clearly defined tasks and areas of responsi-
bility;
• universality of structure, i.e., high flexibility to introduce the necessary changes
to the software and hardware of the subsystems with a relatively low cost of these
changes.
On the basis of the adopted structural concept, two directions for the development
of avionics were clearly established:
• improvement of avionics of main types of aircraft in the process of implementing
programs for their modernization;
• development of a fundamentally new, unified, software-controlled avionics system
of promising aircraft, consisting of a set of typical subsystems.
At present, modernization of the avionics of various types of military aircraft,
begun in 1987–90, is continuing in the USA and other NATO countries. These works
make it possible to keep in service aircraft that entered service 15–20 years ago, such
as the A-6E, A-6F, F-4, F-14F, F-14D, F-15A/B, F-15 C/D, F-15E, F-16C/D, F-111,
etc. The structure of the avionics of these aircraft clearly shows the following basic
functional groups of subsystems, tools and equipment: navigation and landing equip-
ment; means of communication and identification; indication and control system;
weapon control system; means of radio-electronic warfare.
The main avionics of navigation, landing, communications, identification and air
traffic control of foreign military aircraft are given in Tables 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4.
When modernizing the operated aircraft, the structures of their avionics generally
retain the classic look with a relatively low level of integration. The issues of structural
integration are solved by expanding the introduction of digital information sensors,
more advanced airborne computers, numerous processors in avionics subsystems,
high-speed tires of information exchange.
One of the most advanced is the structure of the avionics of the carrier-based
fighter-bomber F/A-18 (Fig. 1.2) [13]. It clearly shows the main functional groups of
subsystems, tools and equipment. The elements of the avionics are based on a micro-
processor system consisting of two airborne computer AN/AYK-14 with mutual
redundancy of functions and separate processors in the main subsystems. Radiotech-
nical navigational information sensors, which form the first (lower) level of the FNC,
exchange data with the course and speed computer at the second level, which, in turn,
exchanges information with a duplicate airborne computer. The exchange of infor-
mation of the course computer and speed-ST with the airborne computer is carried
out through the data bus system in accordance with the standard MIL-STD-1553B,
to which the systems included in the weapon control complex, radio station, INS,
ADS and multi-functional indicators are also connected.
Table 1.2 Aviation navigation and landing modern military foreign aircraft
Equipment naming Tactical aircraft Bomber, military transport, naval
aviation
LORAN equipment Individual types of aircraft Separate types of strategic aviation
Omega (part of F-15 i A-10 planes) aircraft, military transport (C-141,
AC-130H, etc.) and naval aviation
Loran-C (P-3)
SHORAN equipment All major types of aircraft All major types of aircraft
TACAN Major—AN/ARN–118(V) Major—AN/ARN-118(V)
VOR VOR/ILS standart receiver VOR/ILS standart receiver
GPS satellite navigation All major types of aircraft All major types of aircraft
equipment
Equipment for Mainly AN/ARN-118(V) Military transport aircraft and tanker
determining mutual equipment for access to the aircraft with equipment
coordinates and tanker AN/ARN-169 (C-130, C-141),
inter-aircraft navigation TCN-150, AN/ARN-139 etc. (C-5B,
C-17, tanker aircraft)
Automatic direction On most Military transport aircraft and etc.
finder aircraft—AN/ARA-50 type
Radio altimeter On most Military transport aircraft, strategic
aircraft—AN/ARN-194(V) bombers and naval aircrat
type; on undergoing
modernization—AN/ARN-232
Doppler speed and Part of aircraft with radar that Military transport aircraft, strategic
drift-angle meters does not provide measurement bombers (mainly equipment
of ground speed and drift angle AN/ARN-218, AN/ARN-230 type)
(F-111, A-10, etc.)
ILS landing system All aircraft based on the All aircraft based on the standard
equipment standard VOR/ILS receiver VOR/ILS receiver
Equipment based on Aircraft using TRACALS,
landing radar MATCALS system information
information
The airborne computer AN/AYK-14 performs the following functions:

• integrated data processing of navigation systems and sensors;
• data transmission bus operation control;
• control of the display system;
• selection of the most useful data from different sensors;
• pointing air-to-surface weapons;
• aiming air-to-air weapons and defining fire opening zones;
• management of the built-in control system, etc.
When solving a combat mission, one of the airborne computers performs navi-
gation tasks and the other carries weapons. Airborne computer reserve each other.
Their dual use improves the characteristics of the weapons system when both the
Table 1.3 Avionics of communication, identification and air traffic control of modern military
foreign aircraft
Name of systems and tools Tactical aircraft Bomber, military transport,
naval aviation
Ultra-long-wave radio station Airborne command center
(12–60 kHz)
Amplitude modulation Air conquest fighters, Bomber, military transport
short-wave long-range radio multipurpose aircraft and reconnaissance aircraft
station (2–30 MHz)
OBQ (UKB) padioctancii metpovogo diapazona
• Frequency modulation The interaction of tactical Military transport aviation
AN/ARC-186 type aviation with the army and
(30–88 MHz) with the ground forces of the
ground forces
• Amplitude/frequency Communication aircraft with
modulation SINCGARS ground forces
secret jamming equipment
(30–88 MHz)
• AN/ARC-182 type Voice communication with air Voice communication with air
(108–174 MHz) traffic control and digital traffic control and digital
communication of all types of communication of all types of
aircraft aircraft
VHF/UHF radio stations of meter and decimeter ranges
• AN/ARC-164 type Near radiotelephone and Near radiotelephone and
(225–400 MHz) digital communications of all digital communications of all
• Seek Talk jamming types of aircraft types of aircraft.
equipment or Have Quick Communication and
Frequency Hopping transmission of data on the
equipment (225–400 MHz) naval aircraft
• tipa AN/ARQ-182
(300–400 MHz)
Satellite Radio station
• AF Sat Com systems Air Force Satellite Air Force Satellite
(225–400 MHz) Communication Communication
• FLEETSATcom systems Tactical communication
(250–270 MHz; system of naval aircraft
2.6–3.95 GHz)
• Strategic satellite Strategic bombers, airborne
multi-channel command centers
communication
(5.031–5.0907 GHz)
• Advanced satellite Strategic bombers
communications Milstar
system (20/30 i 20/44 GHz)
Datalink
(continued)

Name of systems and tools Tactical aircraft Bomber, military transport,
naval aviation
• Linc-4 (300–325 MHz) Coordination of actions,
• Linc-4A (225–399.975 MHz) exchange of data on the Naval aircraft
combat situation and targets
• Linc-11 Naval aircraft
• Linc-14 All of shipborne aircraft
• PRLS systems Exchange of data with ground
(425–450 MHz) forces
• JTIDS systems All of perspective tactical
(960–1215 MHz) aircraft
• Linc-16
Airborne collision avoidance systems
• AVOID Helicopters
(1.5925–1.6295 GHz)
• TCAS (1030/1090 GHz) Tactical Aircraft Military transport aircraft
Recognition equipment
• Interrogator (1030 GHz) All aircraft with Mk12, Mk15 All aircraft with Mk12, Mk15
• Transponder (1090 GHz) equipment equipment
airborne computers work and provides self-defense and return to its base when one
of the airborne computers failed.
The main volume of information processing is performed by subsystem processes.
The software for the airborne computer and specialized processors is designed to take
into account the possibility of connecting new types of weapons and introducing new
modes of operation of the subsystems.
This approach provides a certain functional autonomy of the sensors and their
integration with the help of the airborne computer designed for solving combat
missions. The advantages of this structure avionics:
• the possibility of simultaneous processing of data in subsystems of avionics, which
allows reducing the speed requirements of various processors;
• simplification of connections between subsystems both in quantity and in data
transfer rate;
• a clear separation of functional responsibilities between avionics subsystems and
aviation REC as a whole;
• simplification of maintenance and modernization of avionics.
Another example of improving the structure of avionics is the modernization of
the F-14A fighter [14]. If its avionics had a pronounced centralized structure, then
the avionics of a modernized F-14D aircraft was built according to a decentralized
structure. All airborne subsystems of the F-14D operate independently of each other
and exchange information as needed.
Table 1.4 Avionics of navigation, landing and data exchange of some types of foreign military aircraft
12
Aircraft type Navigation, landing and data exchange avionics Airborne Digital
Country ILS VOR MLS DME TACAN Radio altimeter GPS Data exchange, Aircraft
communication Computer,
Intersystem
Interface
F-4 (USA, AN/ARN-127 AN/ARN-118 MIL-STD-1553B
GERMANY, Interface
Japan)
F-14D (USA) − − In JTIDS AN/APN-194(V) AN/ARC-182 Two of
terminal AN/ASW-27B AN/AYK-14
JTIDS ADAC,
MIL-STD-1553B
interface
F-15E (USA) AN/ARN-112 AN/ARN-118 AN/APN-232 Collins receiver AN/ARC-164 Delko-D3, AP-1R,
either in the EJS MIL-STD-1553B
JTIDS terminal AN/ARC-190 interface
F/A-18E/F Note AN/ARN-118 AN/ASW-25A Two of
(USA) AN/ARC-182 AN/AYK-14
ADAC,
MIL-STD-1553B
interface
F-16C/D AN/ARN-108 AN/ARN-118 AN/APN-232 + AN/ARC-164 Delko-D3,
(USA) AN/ARC-186 MIL-STD-1553B
JTIDS interface
F-111 (USA) AN/ARN-112 AN/ARN-118 AN/AYK-18,
MIL-STD-1553B
interface
(continued)
1 Place of Aviation Airborne Radio-Electronic Equipment …
Aircraft type Navigation, landing and data exchange avionics Airborne Digital
Country ILS VOR MLS DME TACAN Radio altimeter GPS Data exchange, Aircraft
communication Computer,
Intersystem
Interface
Mirage 2000 + LMT equipment AHV-12 TRT ERA-12 TRT Two of M-2084
(France) ADAC, GINA
interface
Rafale “Socrates” ILS-2000 Radio navigation Sex-tan Avionics
(France) complex Receiver
EF2000 MIDS (simplif.
(Europe) JTIDS)
F/A-22 ICNIA Linc 16
(USA)
JSF (USA) ICNIA (MIDS)
1.2 Airborne Avionics as Part of Aircraft Equipment
Note for on boarding the ship, the airborne course-glide equipment of the two-centimeter range AN/ARA-63 and the receiver AN/ASW-25A of the automatic
command-line transmission line for roll and pitch from the landing radar are used
13
Management and indication
Front control panel Integrated Automatic

control control system Weapon control system
system Electronic
Horizontal Head Up warfare
Indicator Display system
Data processing
System Multifunctional
status indicator AYK-14 AYK-14 Radar
FLIR LST/SCAM Weapon
indicator 1 2 APG-65
MIL-STD-1553 Multiplex data bus
Course and speed calculator Transponder Radiostation Datalink

АРХ-100 ARC-182
INS Beacon Landing Landing and TACAN Beacon Intercom Communication

ASN-130 ADS responder equipment information ARN-118 system
responder coding system
APN-202 ARA-63 exchange
APN-202 KY-58
equipment
ASW-25A
Navigation equipment
Communication and Identification Tools
Fig. 1.2 F/A-18 aircraft avionics structure (FLIR—infrared system; IST/SCAM—combined laser
target designation and attack results recording)
An important feature that distinguishes the avionics of this aircraft from other,
older structures of avionics, is to reduce the amount of information received by the
bus, which is sent to the central airborne computer for processing. This is achieved
by using preprocessing in the processor subsystems and the introduction of five data
buses in accordance with the standard MIL-STD-1553B (two buses for avionics, one
for the airborne computer, one for the radar) and standard MIL-STD-1760 (weapon
bus).
On the F-15E aircraft, the navigation and landing avionics, as well as the digital
automatic flight control system (AFCS), exchange control signals and data between
themselves and with the central computer on a separate bus in accordance with
MIL-STD-1553B (Fig. 1.3). Access to other levels of avionics (display systems and
weapons systems) is carried out through this computer [15].
The basis of the Mirage 2000 fighter’s avionics structure (Fig. 1.4) is the GINA
digital information management system, similar in its basic characteristics to the
MIL-STD-1553B standard. The GINA system is built in the form of two independent
but interconnected networks. Network N1 provides the interaction of navigation,
landing and radar avionics located in the nose, with controls in the cockpit. The N2
network covers weapons preparation and control panels and rocket launchers.
Control networks of the same type of airborne computer M-2084 (main and
backup) are connected to both networks, making up the central computer unit of
the avionics [16].
On the Eurofighter (EF2000) aircraft, all navigation, landing, air traffic control,
communications and state recognition avionics are connected, on the one hand, with
the navigation computer and AFCS using the STANAG 3910 standard avionics bus,
GPS equipment
Aiming point offset
processor
Pre amplifier Receiver processor
Control and display

indicator
ADS computer
ILS equipment
MB1
Head up display
VOR/DME
equipment
Radar data processor Central computer

(F-15 modification)
RADAR
MB MB
MIL-STD
1553B
Horizontal indicator Advanced integrated
computer
MB2
Inertial measurement Control panel IFFC

unit
Vertical indicator
Digital AFCS
Arms control Integrated INS

processor
Control and
display unit INS 1 INS 2
Signal and data
recorder
Fig. 1.3 Structure of the avionics of the aircraft F-15E

IS VHF RS VHF RS Magnetic TACAN ILS Marker RA

compass receiver
Windshield
Radiation
detection aiming indicator
receiver
Combined head-up
display IUSDN ACP
Radar Signal and data
recorder
APP
Control panels
Engine and FIS
ADS RS airplane
sensors control knobs Electronic warfare means
RS
FIS
INS RNS
operating
mode
RNS
ADS
computer
Radar control APP APP

panel
GINA system bus №1
Computer Computer
GINA system bus №2
Missile Missile
APP interface interface unit APP APP APP
unit
Fig. 1.4 Structure of the avionics Mirage 2000 aircraft (IUSDN—interfacing unit of the signal
distribution network; APP—armament preparation panel; ACP—armament control panel; RS—
radio station; IS—identification system)
Non-instrumental Thermal MFD Helmet Video / Audio

Illumination pointers system indicators Recorders
Cabin bus (MIL-STD-1553B)
Cabin Communication Processor
Communication Radio Data IFF system

MLS RA control devices transmission
equipment
Flight control system Avionics bus (STANAG 3910)

(FCS)
Control Landing system Communication Navigation computer Digital character Fire control computer
system for processor generator
aircraft
landing Maintenance and Diagnostic
system System
Fire Control and Identification Bus (STANAG 3910)
Digital engine control
Digital map Infrared Inertial Laser Mission data GPS Radar

base sensor Platform receiver
DASS computer
Electronic self-defense IFF

(DASS) Weapon control computer Weapon control computer
Weapon control system
Fig. 1.5 Structure of the avionics of the aircraft Eurofighter
and on the other hand, the cabin bus, made according to the standard MIL-STD-
1553B—with display systems (Fig. 1.5). Thus, the FNC is formed, functionally
separated from the systems for accomplishing the combat mission and defense.
The generalization of the above and other structures of military aircrafts REC
shows that they are typically characterized by functional division into the following
basic complexes (groups of airborne equipment connected by a single purpose):
• a complex of navigation, aiming and control weapons, which, in turn, includes an
aiming complex (AC) and FNC;
• communication and control complex (CCC);
• defense complex (or electronic warfare complex).
Functionally, the aviation REC is associated with other aircraft systems (weapon
control system, propulsion system, crew life support system, etc.). According to
radio channels, individual airborne systems and REC as a whole in the process of
solving combat and navigation tasks interact with ground stations, radio beacons,
ground-based automatized control and guidance systems, etc.
The basis of a typical REC of a military aircraft is an airborne computer system
(OCS), which includes the airborne computer of REC, the airborne computers of
basic complexes (OCBC) and specialized processors of individual types of avionics.
The airborne computers of the base complexes are intended for solving combat
or navigation tasks. Functionally, they are connected not only with the airborne
equipment coordinated with them, but also with the airborne computer REC, which
is at the top level of the hierarchy of information processing and process control in
REC and which is the computational core of the on-bourd avionics.
Airborne computer of REC carries out information processing and the formation
of control signals and commands in the process of solving combat and navigation
tasks and also performs the role of a system controller that implements information
exchange control algorithms.
The use of three types of computational tools in the OCS (airborne computer of
REC, OCBC and processors of avionics) provides a high degree of parallelism of
information processing, simplifies the organization of interconnections between the
avionics groups and airborne computer.
In OCS, the tasks solved by base complexes and REC as a whole are divided into
hierarchy levels, which leads to a federally centralized structure that most closely
matches the nature of the tasks solved by REC. Due to the use of structural and func-
tional redundancy of computing facilities at all levels of the hierarchy, redundancy
of information exchange channels, a high level of reliability and liveliness of OCS
is achieved.
At the same time, the federally centralized structure of the aviation RECs allows
for the autonomous functioning of the systems and devices included in its structure
in cases when this is necessary.
Reservation of information exchange channels is provided by a multi-level infor-
mation exchange system (MIES), each level of which is controlled by the airborne
computer, which is central to the underlying complex that is subordinate to it.
MIES includes a multi-channel system of multiplexed buses (MB), corresponding
to, for example, the standard MIL-STD-1553B. Each channel, as a rule, has in its
composition two tires—main and reserve.
OCBC along with the processing of information and the formation of control
signals and commands also perform the functions of the MB controllers. Management
of information flows in the MIES is carried out using special exchange programs,
which can be either part of the software of one or several OCBC and OC REC
(operating system) or a control program of the airborne computers specially designed
to manage the exchange of information (system controller).
MIES provides two modes of operation of the base complex:
• normal mode, in which the airborne computers of each of the basic complexes
are directly connected to the MB REC through the interface;
• standby mode, when in the case of a airborne computer of some BC system
(device), which are included in it, through the commutator (COM) can get
information output to MB REC.
In the event of a failure of the OC REC, its functions are assigned to one of the
airborne computer.
Thus, in the REC, there are three levels (layers) of information processing and
information flow management, distributed over three echelons of the organizational
structure:
• At the first, lower, echelon of the hierarchy, information is processed by the

avionics processors.
• At the second tier, information processing and management are carried out by the
airborne computers of the base complexes.
• At the third and highest echelon of the hierarchy, information processing and
information flow management of RECs is performed by the OC REC.
The FNC, which is part of the airborne navigation complex, besides the OC FNC,
includes navigation radio technical and non-radio technical sensors, a flight safety
system, which may include ACAS, inter-aircraft navigation system, a system of
restrictive signals and an early warning system for proximity land (EGPWS), etc.
The control system in the FNC is the ACS.
In a typical aviation REC, a high level of automation of information processing
can be achieved at all levels of the hierarchy and management of processes occurring
in the complex at all stages of the performance of combat missions and in various
modes of its operation. This is achieved due to the presence of an automated control
system (ACS REC) in the aviation REC.
The basis of the ACS REC is an OCS and a display, control and monitoring system
(DCMS). The role of control systems is played by ACS and OC REC. Aircrafts,
OCBC, airborne systems and devices for various purposes serve as managed objects
and crew members as operators. In addition, the components of the ACS REC are the
hardware and software of the complex, which provide the functional interconnection
of the automated control system with air and ground command posts, guidance points,
the ACS of a higher level of hierarchy.
ACS REC also has a hierarchical multilayer structure, due to which, as noted
above, the aviation REC not only implements multi-level information processing
and exchange of information flows between the BC and systems, but also multi-level
process control in the complex.
The given federally centralized structure of the aviation REC in terms of func-
tioning in this complex of avionics for navigation, landing, data exchange and air
traffic control has quite reasonable grounds:
(1) The equipment under consideration is connected with other REC systems by
two types of signals: control signals, which are used to set up the operating
modes, frequency and frequency-code channels of the avionics and informa-
tion signals. The control signals change with a low rate (minutes and tens of
minutes), due to the flight time in the coverage area of a specific radio system,
and they are set either manually on the control panels of the DCMS, or they
come from the OCBC. Along the lines of information signals, the avionavi-
gation electronics interacts with other systems as sensors of information on
measured navigation parameters or information transmitted from the ground
and from other aircraft. The maximum frequency of issuing navigation infor-
mation does not exceed 40 Hz (Table 1.1). The maximum frequency of digital
avionics communications with other airborne systems is up to 60 messages per
minute with a maximum message duration of tens of milliseconds. Compared
with the speed of signal and data processing inside the avionics, this exchange
can be considered slow, and the avionics of navigation, landing, data exchange
and air traffic control are weakly associated with other REC systems.
(2) Signal processing in the considered avionics is subject to the protocols of radio
systems in which this equipment is included. The intervention of external REC
systems with respect to the avionics in order to share resources is, as a rule,
unacceptable, as it can disrupt the measurement process or the process of
receiving information.
(3) The performance of airborne signal processors for the systems listed in Table
1.2 should reach tens of millions of operations per second, and it is inappro-
priate to load the centralized computing resources of the aviation REC with
these processes.
Thus, decentralized, distributed processing of signals and data of radio navigation,
landing, data exchange and air traffic control systems on board aircraft is effective,
and in this sense federated centralized processing structures have advantages over
centralized structures.
1.2.2 Features of Avionics Modern Main Aircraft
The core of the system for computing and processing data of a modern trunk aircraft
is the Flight Management Computer (FMC), an aircraft navigator that is a part of
the flight management computer system (FMCS) and works in cooperation with a
number of specialized computers. It processes information in the interests of the
most important functions of the autopilot and the autothrottle:
• three-dimensional or four-dimensional navigation;
• calculation of flight paths in the vertical and horizontal planes;
• calculation of cruising modes with automatic and directorial control, as well as
with automatic thrust;
• determination of landing parameters for category III.
The implementation of these functions requires the use of all information gener-
ated by the airborne navigation equipment. In addition, a large capacity memory
is required on board to form and store a database necessary for solving navigation
problems and maintaining flight performance.
Airborne navigation systems (flight mode optimization) have been developed over
the past 20 years through a gradual transition from analog to digital systems. The
FMCS development program for the B-767 began in 1978 and was soon extended
to the B-757 aircraft. Officially, this program was approved in 1982. Soon, airborne
FMCS systems were widely used both on long-haul aircraft and on parts of local
airplanes and GA. ARINC has released the appropriate ARINC 702 specification.
As a result of the development of digital airborne systems, commercial airlines
received a fully integrated airborne system for flight planning, accurate navigation,
recommendations, control and display.
FMCS aircraft B-767 and B-757 includes two FMC and two control and display
units (CDU). Initially, they only interacted with traditional navigation equipment
(VOR, DME, INS, radio compass, ILS) and with the flight control computer (FCC).
In future, the FMCS architecture of Boeing airplanes was complemented by the
possibilities of using information from Omega, GPS, MLS, TCAS systems, wind
shear detection, S mode ATC, etc. It was also possible to implement the RTA function
(required time of arrival). This function allows the crew to designate route control
points in addition to the spatial coordinates as temporal characteristic. Realizing this
function, the airborne system controls the flight along the most economical trajectory
according to the declared route at the required height and at a specified time, set before
departure, during flight or descent.
In addition to providing economy of flights, the RTA function can be used in
an automatic dependent surveillance system (ADSS) for the purpose of organizing
air traffic flows, in particular, approach approach planning programs, separation of
departing aircraft and airway separation.
The inclusion of consumer equipment in the FMCS system of the GPS system
has led to the fact that even improved ATC systems cannot surpass them. Thus, in the
coming years, the possibility of increasing the capacity due to improved navigation
accuracy will force the transition to air traffic control using FMCS, SRNS, ADS and
radar observation will be assigned the role of independent protection against gross
errors.
One of the ways to improve the FMCS was the integration of its functions with
the EICAS functions (“synoptic” displays), for example, in the Primus Honeywell
systems. Another way is to combine FMCS with navigation and landing avionics.
An example is the GNS-X equipment from Global Wulsberg Systems Inc. (USA),
combining FMS with internal sensors information systems Loran-C, DME/DME,
VOR/DME.
Typical for modern foreign aircraft is the structure of the FNC of the aircraft B747-
400 [17]. On this plane, avionics of navigation, landing and ATC (two GPS receivers,
three ILS receivers, two VOR receivers, two DME transceivers, two ARCs, two ATC
transponders) are connected via control inputs and information outputs by a serial
interface corresponding to ARINC 429, with two FMC solvers. The ILS receivers
also provide information directly to the three flight control computers of the FCC
and via interface units to the electronic flight system using the EFIS instruments.
Management of avionics on this plane in the director mode can be carried out
directly from the control panels ILS, VOR/DME, transponders, ADF.
A similar structure was implemented on aircraft B757 and B767 [18].
In the Russian civil aviation, the avionics of navigation, landing and air traffic
control are represented, for example, in FNC of the Tu-204, Tu-214, Il-96 aircraft.
A simplified diagram of the connections of this avionics with FMS, FCS and thrust
control system (TCS) is shown in Fig. 1.6 [19].
FNC provides a solution to a wide range of tasks that can be divided into four
groups:
MNRLS-85 ARK-85 KPRTS-85 KHAE-85 IRS SVS-85

(WXR) (ADF) (IREC) (aviation clock) (ADS) RSDN-85
(LORAN)
№1 №2 №1 №2 №1 №2 №1 №2 №3 №1 №2 №3
VSUT-85 VSS-85 VSS-85 VSUP-85

(TCS) (FMCS) (FMCS) (FCCS)
№1 №2
№1 №2 №1 №2 №3
№1 №2 №1 №2 №1 №2 №1 №2 №1 №2 №3 №1 №2 №3 №1 №2 №3
SNS-85
(GPS) DME/Р-85
OSA-S RSBN-85 VOR-85 ILS-85 MLS-85 RV-85
(ATC RBS) (SHORAN) (VOR) (DME) (ILS) (MLS) (RA)
Fig. 1.6 Simplified structural diagram of FNC (shaded by avionics of navigation, landing and ATC)
• directorial control of the aircraft on takeoff in lateral and longitudinal movement

from the moment of separation from the runway;
• automated piloting along programmed trajectories;
• automatic landing approach for categories II and IIIA with the subsequent run;
• displaying and documenting current navigation and other information on devices
of the electronic indication system, integrated electronic alarm system, run-up
and landing indication system, system for collecting and localizing failures (not
shown in Fig. 1.6).
The avionics navigation, landing and air traffic control are carried out mainly on
the interfaces corresponding to ARINC 429. The equipment is controlled in automatic
(from FMCS) or directorial (from IREC) modes. Avionics navigation and landing
information is used:
• for the correction of the numerical coordinates and the implementation of
navigation in FMCS (RSBN, RSDN, SRNS, VOR, DME);
• to provide navigation on the drive and broadcasting radio stations (ADF);
• to provide the FCCS, a warning system for the proximity of the earth, a system
for collecting and localizing failures with true altitude (RA) data;
• for landing on signals of deviations from the lines and the glide path (ILS, MLS)
supplied to the FMCS and to the devices of information display systems;
• to provide the crew with sound information on the identification of navigation
radio beacons (VOR, DME, RSBN), landing radio beacons (ILS, MLS), on the
passage of route and landing beacons; call sign drive radio (ADF).
Figure 1.7 presents a simplified block diagram of the BNK-2P navigation system
of the Il-86 aircraft (reservation not shown) [10]. The core of the NK is an airborne
computer for aircraft navigation, in which navigation information from the avionics of
navigation and landing (RSBN, DME, RSDN) and autonomous navigation aids (iner-
tial course vertical, basic course and vertical system, ADS, DSDM) comes through
Display and control system
WXR WXR indicator Routine Navigation Indicator
Information input Navigation

and indication planning
console instrument
Switching unit
ADF ILS VOR RSBN DSDM
Prepearing and FMCS

control panel DME
ADS Inertial Course Vertical
Basic course and vertical system

LORAN
To the flight
complex
Fig. 1.7 Simplified structural diagram of the navigation complex BNK-2P aircraft Il-86 (⇔—
digital connections; ← —analog connections)
digital channels. The output information of the airborne navigation computer is deliv-
ered to the display system and to the aerobatic complex. Analog signals of the ADF,
ILS, VOR, RSBN, DSDM through the switching unit are fed directly to the planned
navigation device. From Fig. 1.7, the unifying role of the airborne computers is
clearly visible. Note that the architecture of BNK-2P corresponds to ARINC 702.
Along with the long-haul aircraft abroad, great attention is paid to equipping the
aircraft of local airlines, GA, business aviation. An example of a complex for such
aircraft is the Allied Signal Gold Crown III family of equipment.
From the above review, it follows that the avionics of navigation, landing, data
exchange and air traffic control in the FNC of modern civil aircraft is one of the main
sources of information (and during landing—the main) to ensure the flight of the
aircraft. It is mainly associated with FMCS, control panels and information display
systems and weakly connected with other aircraft systems.
A FNC of civil aviation aircraft can be schematically represented as a two-echelon
hierarchical system, at the lower level of which there is an avionics of navigation,
landing, data acquisition, data exchange and air traffic control system, and at the top
level—the FMCS with control panels and EIA.
References
1. Olyanyuk PV (2002) Vozdushnyj transport v sovremennom mire. SPb: «Galeya Print» 291s
2. Air Transport Association Handbook (1990)
3. «Opredeleniya terminov IKAO, ispol’zuemyh v Konvencii o mezhduna-rodnoj grazhdanskoj
aviacii, Prilozheniyah k nej, a takzhe Pravilah aeronavigacionnogo obsluzhivaniya». Dos.9569,
1991.
4. Kuznecov SV (1998) Analiz struktury sovremennyh kompleksov i sistem avioniki vozdushnyh
sudov grazhdanskoj aviacii. Nauch. vestnik MGTU GA. Ser. Avionika. 3, 6–25
5. GOST 18977-79 «Kompleksy bortovogo oborudovaniya samoletov i ver-toletov. Tipy
funkcional’nyh svyazej. Vidy i urovni elektricheskih signalov».
6. Modernizaciya parka strategicheskih bombardirovshchikov VVS SSHA v nositeli obychnogo
oruzhiya. NTI. Ser. Aviac. sistemy /NIC Gos NIIAS. 1994. 11–12, 10–13
7. Osnovnye napravleniya razvitiya bortovogo radioelektronnogo oboru-dovaniya passazhirskih
samoletov. NTI. Ser. Aviac. sistemy /NIC Gos NIIAS. 1994. 11–12, 18–27
8. Programmy sozdaniya bortovogo elektronnogo oborudovaniya aviacion-nyh boevyh
kompleksov. NTI. Ser. Aviac. sistemy /NIC GosNIIAS. 1995. 2, 8–17
9. Gromov GN, ZHiharev VP (1988) Vybor novyh vidov tekhnologij dlya radio-elektronnogo
aviacionnogo oborudovaniya. Voprosy radioelektroni-ki. Ser.OVR. 8:68–73
10. «Rukovodstvo po trebuemym navigacionnym harakteristikam (RNP)». Doc.9613-AN/937.
ICAO, izd.2, 1999.
11. Report of the Special Communication/Operations Divisional Meeting. Doc.9650. ICAO, 1995.
12. Formirovanie i primenenie integral’nogo radionavigacionnogo po-lya /A.D.Argunov,
S.N.Malyukov, A.D.Matyushenko i dr. Radiotekhnika. 1998 9:31–36
13. Malyukov SN (2001) Integral’naya radionavigacionnaya sistema. Osnovy i problemy
funkcionirovaniya. Sb. dokladov IV Ross. nauch.-tekhn. konf-cii «Sovremennoe sostoyanie,
problemy navigacii i okeanografii» («NO-2001»), 6–9 iyunya 2001g. Tom 1. SPb.
14. Denisov VI (1996) Perspektivy razvitiya i ispol’zovaniya radionavigaci-onnyh sistem.
Radiotekhnika 1:53–57
15. Solov’ev YuA (2000) Sistemy sputnikovoj navigacii. M.: Eko-Trendz
Rossijskoj Federacii». Utv. Postanovleniem Pravitel’stva RF ot 22.02.2000g. №144.
17. Kofman MM, Suslov VD, Surov BI, SHek-Iovsepyanc RA (1999) Osnovnye tradicionnye i
netradicionnye zadachi kompleksirovaniya bortovogo oborudovaniya letatel’nyh ob"ektov. Mir
avioniki. 6:30–33.
18. Buravlev AI, Krasnov AM, Moiseev AG, Pasekunov IV (1996) Osnovy kon-cepcii postroeniya
integrirovannyh interaktivnyh kompleksov avia-cionnogo vooruzheniya. Radiosistemy. Inte-
grirovannye kompleksy i sistemy, vyp. 17. 70–74. (ZHurnal v zhurnale «Radiotekhnika».-
1996.-№9)
References 25
19. Bajbara VP (1996) Upravlenie algoritmicheskim obespecheniem radioloka-cionnogo kanala

aviacionnyh kompleksov bortovogo oborudovaniya. Radiosistemy. Integrirovannye kompleksy
i sistemy, 1996, vyp.17. 90–95. (ZHurnal v zhurnale «Radiotekhnika». №9).
Chapter 2
Concepts and Programs of Creation
of Airborne Integrated Avionics
2.1 Concepts and Programs for Creating Military Airborne

Integrated Avionics in the USA and Western Europe
2.1.1 Organization and Perspective Directions of US

Research
The development of avionics in the USA is of a sporadic nature and is provided by

a large amount of fundamental and exploratory research. For example, in 1989, at
the request of the US Congress, the United States Department of Defense (DoD)
developed a report on the most important areas of research in the field of armaments
and military equipment (AME) entitled “Plan for Priority Technologies” [1, 2]. The
report highlighted 22 areas (technologies), the development of which allowed to
significantly improve the combat properties of weapons and military equipment.
The criterion for the selection of technologies was more than a threefold increase
in the tactical and technical characteristics of weapons of military technology or
the imposition of weapons of military technology with qualitatively new properties.
When forming the list of technologies, preference was given to areas of interest to
several branches of the US Armed Forces. In addition to the list of technologies, the
report of the US DoD identified possible results of the stages of work by 1990, 1995
and 2000.
The US Congress made a decision obliging the DoD to submit an annual report on
priority technologies. These documents form the basis of AME development planning
and budget allocation for the US DoD. Analysis of the reports of the US DoD shows
that its leadership links the development of weapons and military equipment primarily
with the improvement of radio electronics, and all priority technologies can be used
in advanced aviation equipment and armaments.
The United States Air Force (USAF) is the leading type of the United States Armed
Forces in the field of integrated development of radio electronics and considers its
improvement as a military factor in increasing aviation capabilities. For this purpose,
28 2 Concepts and Programs of Creation of Airborne …
fundamental and exploratory research plans are periodically developed. In particular,

in the late 1980s of the last century, the program “Forecast 2” (“Project Forecast 2”)
was developed. Similar research plans of the USAF are approximately every 20 years
[3].
As a result of the analysis, the most promising concepts of further development
of equipment and weapons were selected, which could be implemented at the end of
the twentieth and early twenty-first century. In total, 39 promising technologies and
31 concepts of new systems were selected, which should ensure a radical increase in
the effectiveness of methods of warfare and guarantee the US Air Force a military-
technical superiority over the likely adversary. Research in the field of fundamental
sciences, the latest technologies and concepts contained in the “Forecast 2” program
was officially approved as promising “initiatives,” i.e., included in the number of
tasks required for the decision of the operational commands of the Air Force.
From the list of technologies included in the “Forecast 2” program [3], we note
the following areas related to airborne avionics:
• monolithic integrated circuits (ICs) of the millimeter and microwave ranges
(MIMIC), arsenide–gallium ICs;
• software development;
• computers with parallel architecture;
• systems with knowledge bases (including the development of three systems: infor-
mation processing and display systems for combat management, advanced crew
cabins and “intelligent” aircraft casing with distributed built-in sensors;
• artificial intelligence (including the creation of an integrated avionics control
system that reduces the number of false alarms about failures and predicts failures);
• integrated optics (creation of optical storage devices, signal and data processors);
• fiber optics;
• highly sensitive radar;
• passive sensors (sensors intended for detecting targets, monitoring the situation
or condition of equipment operating in the microwave, infrared, optical and X-ray
ranges);
• automatic target recognition;
• phased antenna arrays;
• integration and joint processing of data.
Estimating airborne avionics as a unified technical field of combat operations, the
US Air Force command sees the main direction of improving this technology through
the integration of various tools and subsystems, the improvement of signal and data
processing methods, the introduction of new electronic devices and elements, and
the development of technologies in software development and maintenance.
The main attention is paid to the equipment of tactical airplanes, which is deter-
mined by the diversity and high dynamic solution of combat missions by one or
two crew members. According to the views of US Air Force specialists, the combat
use of strategic and military transport aircraft is not qualitatively more complex in
terms of avionics functions and requires the latter to improve mainly its quantita-
tive characteristics. In addition, the conditions for locating and ensuring the work of
2.1 Concepts and Programs for Creating Military Airborne … 29
avionics on board military transport and strategic aviation aircraft are much lighter
than conditions on tactical aircraft.
In the interest of coordinating the development of radio electronics in the US
Air Force, a document is periodically drawn up on technical directions (Technical
Objectives Document), which serves as an indicative program for the development
of the corresponding type of technology for the next decade. Of the many areas of
concrete work, we note only some of them, which determined the development of
integrated avionics after 1988:
• creation of a multi-type integrated threat warning system;
• improvement of multiplexed airborne information distribution networks with
interchangeable users;
• standardization of processors that provide maneuver with numerical resources
and memory;
• development of integrated airborne systems with adaptive troubleshooting capa-
bilities;
• research of the concept of creating an integrated receiver–processor device;
• improvement of the structure and design of radio-electronic complexes (RECs),
including the creation of such a REC structure that provides backup capabilities for
performing tasks in the event of failures, a maneuver of signal and data processing
resources, and maintenance using built-in monitoring and diagnostics devices;
development of a modular design principle with its extension to installation parts,
connecting devices, means of interfacing with information highways;
• development of general methods for processing information with minimal use of
specific techniques in specific types of equipment;
• further development of digital filtering techniques;
• perspective integrated system of crew interaction with cabin equipment;
• creation of a simulator of the environment of the airborne REC operation in the
interests of evaluating the concepts of building avionics, testing its individual
types, analyzing the interaction of the pilot with the aircraft systems;
• development of a prospective expandable test center for integrated systems;
• development of integrated avionics for communications, navigation and identifi-
cation;
• development of integrated antenna systems for the operation of integrated avionics
communications, navigation and identification;
• development of an integrated inertial system for use instead of other autonomous
sensors in navigation, flight control and weapon delivery systems;
• development of adaptive tactical navigation systems containing a database of a
digital terrain map and constantly rebuilding its algorithms for solving navigation
tasks and its configuration depending on the nature of the threat, requirements for
accuracy and availability of resources.
2.1.2 Military Integration Programs for Avionics in the USA
In connection with the increase in the number of functions performed and the
complexity of airborne avionics electronic systems, the issues of universalization,
unification and integration of airborne avionics are becoming increasingly important.
To date, significant studies have already been carried out abroad on airborne avionics
integration programs.
In the 1970s, the USA implemented a program for creating a system for collecting
and processing information (DAIS—digital avionics information system), during
which information bus was developed that conforms to the MIL-STD-1553B stan-
dard, a data processing processor according to the MIL-STD-1750A and program-
ming language JOVIAL standard MIL-STD-1589B. The result of the implementation
of the DAIS program was the creation of the second generation of avionics, which
is a set of replaceable units manufactured in large series by many companies, which
significantly reduced the cost of equipment and simplified maintenance. The results
were used, in particular, in the development programs for the US Air Force F-15,
F-16 and B-1 aircraft [4].
In the same years, the US Air Force began research on the Pave Pillar program,
which included the development of a new airborne equipment architecture, a family
of unified electronic modules and systems based on them. As part of the Pave Pillar
program in the USA, work began on the creation of multifunctional airborne commu-
nications, navigation and identification equipment designed for the equipment of
promising aircraft and helicopters.
Pave Pillar is devoted to numerous publications and presentations at the NAECON,
PLANS and Digital Avionics Systems Conferences, an overview of which is given
in [3, 4].
The program provided for the definition, development and evaluation of new
airborne equipment construction principles for solving three main tasks:
• increase aircraft combat readiness;
• increase crew efficiency;
• lower operating costs.
The stages of the development of the Pave Pillar program are given in Table 2.1.
At the initial stage of work on the Pave Pillar program, an analysis of previous
works in the field of airborne avionics architecture was carried out. The existing
avionics systems were combined according to the functional principle: aircraft
control systems, navigation systems, electronic countermeasure systems, weapon
delivery control systems, communication systems, etc. In each type of avionics,
devices were created that provide reception, signal processing, processing data and
display. After the implementation of the DAIS program, the federated–centralized
architecture replaced the autonomous classic.
In the process of implementing the Pave Pillar program, a new approach was
developed to solve the integration problem of airborne avionics: the trunk-modular
Table 2.1 The stages of the development of the Pave Pillar program
Program milestones Program stages
1973–1980 Development of the concept of building multifunctional wide-range
aircraft equipment Modular, Multifunction, Multiband Airborne Radio
System (MFBARS)
Performers:
Group I—ITT, Texas Instruments, Intermetrics;
Group II—firms TRW, Rockwell Collins, Singer-Kearfott, General
Dinamics
1981–1982 Assessing and defining Integrated Communication Navigation
Identification Avionics (ICNIA) communication, navigation and
identification system architecture
1983–1988 Hardware implementation of options in the form of three models for flight
and ground tests on airplanes and helicopters
The performers are ITT and TRW
1988–1993 Testing and evaluation of equipment models. Production of equipment and
its implementation on promising multifunctional aircraft and helicopters
structure of the equipment and the modular structure of the software that formed the
look of avionics.
Airborne avionics was divided into three complexes (Fig. 2.1) [3]:
• management of combat missions;
• control of airborne sensors;
• aircraft control.
• the functions of the control complex for the implementation of combat missions
were identified:
• navigation, including following the terrain and flying over obstacles;
• target detection and tracking;
• weapon control;
• management of defense assets;
• control of the state of avionics.
• functions of the airborne sensor control complex:
• signal processing;
• highlighting the necessary information and its distribution among the elements of
the complex;
• ensuring secret data exchange.
The functions of the aircraft control complex are aircraft and engine control.
In order to ensure flight safety, the aircraft control complex was physically isolated
from the rest of the equipment and had fourfold redundancy.
The isolation of these complexes in the avionics composition marked the bound-
aries of resource sharing, since it was found that the unique characteristics of each
of the complexes impede the use of the same resources in all three complexes.
The modular architecture of Pave Pillar was based on isolating common functions
in all avionics (e.g., signal processing, data processing, mating, etc.) and developing
6 161616
108
11 17
1 12 14
14 19
2 3 7
14
4
9 13
18
5
14 14
15
(1 - sensors; 2 - sensor signal distribution network; 3 - signal processor; 4 suspension control
system; 5 - suspension system; 6 - video data bus; 7 - data exchange network; 8 - multiplexed
combat control system bus; 9 - data processors of the aircraft control system; 10 - system
memory; 11 - data transmission bus; 12 - data processors of the combat mission control
system; 13- flight control system, engine and power supply system; 14 - analog-digital and
digital-analog converters; 15 - multiplex in aircraft control system 16 - indicators; 17 -
avionics, part of the performance of combat mission management; 18 - avionics controls in
the cockpit; 19 - indicators pilot wearing a helmet)
Fig. 2.1 Architecture avionics proposed in the program Pave Pillar
identical standard elements called common modules. Common modules, in turn,

were created on the basis of a limited set of ultra-fast (VHSIC) and superlarge
(VLSI) integrated circuits. Each module is designed to perform a specific function
of digital information processing (Fig. 2.2). At the same time, it has its own pairing
control circuitry and built-in monitoring tools for diagnosing the state of the module.
The possibility of creating nonstandard (specific) modules was not denied, but it was
assumed that they would constitute only an insignificant part of all modules.
The interaction of the modules was ensured by information high-bandwidth high-
ways (high data transfer speeds). To solve this problem, it was assumed the use of
fiber communication lines, which were supposed to replace the existing highways
Fig. 2.2 Principle of modular construction of avionics in the program Pave Pillar
that meet the standard MIL-STD-1553B, is exposed to electromagnetic pulses and

EW facilities and has an insufficient data transfer rate.
The modular architecture of Pave Pillar provided distributed data processing,
integration and reconfiguration of modules and functions. A set of modules could
be applied when forming a large number of signal processing and data processing
functions (Fig. 2.2).
The modular software was supposed to distribute the solution of various tasks
among several processors. In case of overload or failure of any processors, several
tasks could be solved by a single processor with time separation.
With this approach, each type of airborne equipment should have included several
modules of general purpose and one or two special modules, the functions of which
were determined by a specific system.
As part of the Pave Pillar program, not only the functional and technical (construc-
tive) architecture of the REC was developed, but also the management architecture
and information architecture (interfaces between modules).
The airborne avionics control architecture included four hierarchical levels:
• system-wide (decision-making-level pilot);
• level of interconnected functional subsystems;
• level of sensors and actuators;
• level of information processing from mobile aircraft suspended products.
With this approach to control in RECs, instead of the “coordinator” and “inte-
grator” functions, the interaction of various subsystems implements the “system
control” functions, which determine only the main goals of the entire REC opera-
tion and limitations, and their implementation at the lower levels is performed by
the control system, the basis of which is the airborne computer system (OCS) [5].
The implemented management principles are similar to the hierarchical autonomy

principle proposed by G.N. Gromov.
The concept of information architecture sets the levels and nature of interfaces
within the REC. In accordance with the Pave Pillar program, a three-level hierarchy
of informational connections is implemented in RECs:
• high-speed local information communications between sensors and modules of
specialized processors;
• intermodule interface within each functional system or element of information
processing of OCS;
• intersystem intraobjective connections providing connections within a single
REC.
The main advantages that are provided by the federally centralized REC
architecture with system orientation are the following [5]:
• Development of separate functional subsystems of RECs is carried out for the most
part autonomously by various mi-contractors, and their subsequent integration
ensures the functional integration of the complex as a whole in all modes of its
operation.
• Information processing is parallelized in time in computational media that are
heterogeneous in their organization and characteristics.
• Software has a modular structure.
• It is possible to reconfigure the structure in case of equipment failures.
• It is possible to modernize and increase the number of functional subsystems of
RECs with virtually no change in the topology of physical connections at the
intersystem (intraobjective) level.
The latter situation is especially important, since according to foreign experts, it
is often necessary to make several upgrades of its equipment during the life cycle of
the operation of a modern aviation REC.
Simultaneously with the Pave Pillar program and on the basis of its results, for
a number of years, work has been carried out on a number of programs accom-
panying the creation of the promising tactical use of the US Air Force Advanced
Tactical Fighter (ATF), the promising aircraft of the US Navy Advanced Tactical
Aircraft (ATA), later called the A-12, and the Light Helicopter Experimental (LHX)
helicopter. These include, in particular, the creation program:
• universal processor common signal processor (CSP);
• multi-mode highly reliable radar URR;
• integrated INEWS;
• ICNIA integrated communications, navigation and identification system (inte-
grated communications, navigation and identification avionics);
• integrated inertial reference system—IIRA;
• IRST—infrared search and tracking system;
• high-speed digital bus (HSDB);
• Ada operating system;
• automated software creation.

The results of the work under these programs were to be used in the development
of fifth-generation aircraft, which were planned to be taken on board in the 1990s. In
fact, some of the results were already used during the modernization of the airborne
avionics of the F-16 aircraft [6], and the main results were later introduced into the
aircraft F-22 Raptor aircraft of the Lockheed Martin/Boeing aircraft and the RAH
66 Comanche helicopter of the Boeing/Sikorsky [7].
The defining programs for the development of integrated airborne avionics were
the CSP, ICNIA and INEWS programs.
The goal of the CSP program was to develop a standard processor architecture
for the digital processing of signals from various sensors. As a result, the Hughes
Common Integral Processor (CIP) was developed, which became the main element
of the ATF.
The main goal of the ICNIA program is to demonstrate the technical feasibility of
modules of an integrated system operating in a wide range of frequencies, controlled
and reconfigured by a computer. The system had to perform functions of 12–14
different navigation, communication and identification systems in the 2 MHz to
2 GHz frequency range. The ICNIA system is based on the integration of various
transceivers, signal processors and a universal data processor [4].
The ICNIA and INEWS programs were considered as a technological basis for
the preliminary design of integrated equipment of promising aircraft. Note that in
the Pave Pillar program, the division of airborne avionics into integrated systems
was originally incorporated in accordance with the typical structure of aviation REC
discussed above.
In 1986, the Pave Pillar program was completed with the publication of a descrip-
tion of the airborne avionics architecture, developed on the basis of the results of
parallel work carried out by seven contracting firms. This was enshrined in docu-
menting the agreement of industry and government, as a result of which the modular
integral principle of building airborne avionics was adopted by Congress and the
US Department of Defense. The development of a single complex of equipment
based on common modules and a single architecture was envisaged. To this end,
in March 1987 the United Unified Plan for Integrated Avionics Joint Integrated
Avionics Plan (JIAP) was adopted by three genera of the US Armed Forces, which
includes 28 R & D programs, which formulated specific tasks for the creation of the
main functional elements of equipment, applied technologies and software security.
To guide the program of creating a unified airborne avionics complex, a special
working group Joint Integrated Avionics Working Group (JIAWG) was formed,
which in 1989 completed the development of the Advanced Standard Avionics
Advanced Architecture3 based on the architectures designed by the Pave Pillar
Air Force program and the similar Advanced Avionics Technology Development
(AATD) Navy program, and standards for the functional elements and modules of
the airborne equipment, identified the entire nomenclature of basic elements of the
REC, which are included in the programs for the full-scale development stage and
became the basis for the serial complex [8].
Communication, Control and Traffic control.

navigation, display devices Flight control
recognition
Optoelectronic
Systems
Weapons and
Data Transfer countermeasur
Radar Devices, Mass es
Storage
Interference
Means of electronic Integrated core
management
warfare processors
Sensor data distribution High speed data bus Video data Avionics Data Bus Bus MIL-STD-1553B
distribution MIL-STD-1553B
Fig. 2.3 Architecture military modular avionics A3 ( —Racks of SEM-E modules)
A3 architecture assumes higher hardware and functional integration of airborne

equipment modules based on VHSIC and MIMIC technologies compared to the
Pave Pillar architecture. At the same time, integration of airborne antennas, complex
processing and synthesis of information from various airborne radar sensors, coun-
termeasures, as well as data received via communication channels are provided.
A3 architecture provides resource allocation at much earlier stages of information
processing—already when exchanging signals with transceiver devices (Fig. 2.3)
[9].
According to the tasks performed, the ATF avionics built on the A3 architecture
are divided into three functional areas: the central processor complex, communica-
tions complex, navigation, recognition and combat mission control complex (radar
functions, countermeasures, etc.). The central processor complex consists of 90–100
modules of 10–15 different types. In the complex of communication, navigation
and identification, 90–100 modules of 30–40 different types are used. The combat
mission management complex consists of 80–120 modules of 50–60 different types.
In the whole complex of integrated avionics, there are from 300 to 400 processor
modules, most of which perform computational functions. This does not include
processors that provide control of the aircraft and hundreds of microprocessors that
control the transceiver modules of the phased array radar.
Very important for the development of integrated avionics, appropriate architec-
ture A3 JIAWG, was the program Airborne Shared Aperture Program (ASAP), which
aimed to develop on the basis of the MIMIC technology a broadband antenna with
electronic control, embedded in the skin of the low-profile aircraft. As part of the
program, the possibility of integrating radar antennas, countermeasures, communi-
cations in time-sharing mode or in a special mode of operation, as well as evaluation
of the field of view, resolution characteristics, phase and amplitude sensitivity of the
distributed aperture was considered.
The ASAP goes back to the early 1980s. Since 1981, the US Air Force has been
working to solve the problem of reducing the number of antennas on board the aircraft.
In particular, within the framework of the Adaptive Multifunction Antenna (AMA)
program, the development of adaptive multifunctional antenna arrays designed to
ensure the operation of various airborne systems that are part of the ICNIA was
developed. This direction was continued in the program INEWS. In this case, the need
arose for the integration of apertures, as well as electronic systems for controlling
antenna systems, and, consequently, the need to identify common sections of the
frequency range.
The development of the next-generation phased array antenna (PAA) in the USA is
associated with the development of conformal antennas corresponding to the shape of
an airframe. Techniques for implementing such PAAs are incorporated in the Smart
Skins concept [10] recommended for development in the framework of the Fore-
cast II program. The first step toward creating a design with distributed microwave
and microelectronic elements housed in the aircraft casing was the Conformal
Array Radar Technology (CART) program, which aimed to develop a radar with
a conformal PHAR by the company Raytheon [11].
Currently, conformal antenna arrays have already been redesigned on B-2, F-
117A, F/A-22 aircraft and have created multifunctional active PAA for F-35 fighter
[12].
The creation of an “electronic skin” allows combining the avionics, which receive
and emit radio frequency signals and practically implement broadband systems,
which are an important addition to the Stealth program. As a result, a significant
reduction in the effective scattering area of the avionics antenna systems based on
the antenna modules and distributed processors, which provide flexible control of
the electronic aperture radiation, can be achieved.
The further development of aviation RECs revealed a number of shortcomings
of federally centralized architecture, especially in the area of airborne computing
systems [5]. In such OCSs, no redistribution of resources between the computing
means of the subsystems is envisaged. Usually, only duplication of the most impor-
tant tasks performed by top-level computing tools is implemented. The process of
improving the characteristics of REC and its OCSs cannot also continue continuously
by increasing the number of non-homogeneous computers used, even while simul-
taneously improving their technical characteristics. It is impossible to fully adapt
the functional resources of the OCS to various changes in the external environment,
which is associated with the use of physical trunk connections. Unsustainable use of
OCS resources leads to unreasonably high gauge–weight and energy characteristics.
Continuing research and implementation of technical ideas defined in the Pave
Pillar program was carried out as part of the Pave Pace program. The results of these
studies formed the basis for the design of promising RECs for aircraft, including
the multipurpose JSF combat aircraft (F-35), hypersonic aerospace aircrafts and new
unmanned aircrafts.
The main concept of avionics in the Pave Pace program is based on the integration
of information sensors of airborne systems in order to form an objective real picture
of the external situation, as well as output the resulting information to the indicators
of the information-controlling field developed according to its characteristics. In this

case, the crew monitors the airborne information, and the complex itself makes the
connection of the necessary sensors to answer the pilot’s questions. Unlike previous
RECs, it is envisaged that avionics will automatically control the sensors, freeing the
pilot from this task. During the flight, the pilot will set the initial data that defines
the current goals of managing the complex as a whole.
The avionics of the new-generation aircraft will include the already used func-
tional subsystems with significantly improved characteristics, as well as completely
new types of functional equipment, which include high-performance computing
facilities.
In contrast to RECs with a federated architecture, an integrated multi-sensor envi-
ronment is formed in complexes of the new generation without physical separa-
tion into separate subsystems. In general, it may include the following information
channels:
• radar;
• radio intelligence;
• indicative information;
• optical–electronic sighting and navigation;
• information suppression.
In addition, at least two airborne operational advising expert systems should be
present in the REC of prospective aircrafts:
• long-range air combat;
• diagnose and eliminate failures.
Integrated avionics combines information from various sensors to represent the
full combat situation in the display system, which has undergone dramatic changes
in terms of imaging on many screens, in color and in three dimensions.
The new approach is based on the implementation of the most complete indepen-
dence of the tasks to be solved on the organization and characteristics of the REC
equipment. It justifies the need to create a OCS by the type of an integrated computing
environment (ICE), in which there is no regular distribution of computational tools
by functional subsystems and information channels of the RECs.
The conceptual features of the technology of designing the ICE include [5]:
• openness and adaptability of the OCS architecture to various applications;
• deep unification and standardization of all hardware and software components of
OCS;
• deep functional and instrumental integration;
• a high level of technological effectiveness of the process of developing a OCS,
including information exchange tools.
The principle of openness should provide opportunities for the development,
improvement and modernization of OCS. It should provide for the construction of
OCS, the characteristics of which can vary widely depending on the requirements of
a particular application.
HF
Synthesized graphic displays
Memory interfaces
Sensor data
distribution Signal and image Knowledge
network processing processing
Electro optics
Graphics tools
System interconnection 50-100 MBPS
Integrated Integrated analog

multifunctional processing
apertures
Supercomputing
Extremely reliable packaging / cooling
Fig. 2.4 Architecture of the integrated avionics system in the Pave Pace program
The concept of deep unification and standardization is based on the use of basic
commercial COTS technologies, which have been widely developed in recent years.
Their adaptation to military applications contributes both to a reduction in the cost
of developing avionics and to a reduction in the duration of work, which ensures the
feasibility and acceptable cost of avionics [13]. In the USA, the use of commercially
available component products that meet industrial standards has been practically
legalized in military developments since 1994 [14].
The key elements of the Pave Pace program (Fig. 2.4) were [15]:
• creation in the form of standard replaceable SEM-E modules of computers with
a capacity of at least 1 Gflops and dimensions 3–4 times smaller compared to the
computing modules created using the Pave Pillar program;
• creation of a modular optical high-speed network of cross-switches operating at a
speed of 1–2 Gbit per second, which provides fault-tolerant connections between
signal sensors and signal processing centers;
• creation of an integrated radio frequency (RF) sensor, which is a system consisting
of a small number of antennas, analog synthesizers, receivers, transmitters and
switches, made in the form of standard SEM-E modules.
Common antennas provide overlapping frequency ranges for various functions.
It was determined that 13–22 antennas will be required, depending on the level of
functionality and survey area required for the aviation REC. These types of antennas
include a multi-turn loop antenna for RF and microwave functions, a multi-arm
helical antenna to provide coverage for other communication, navigation and recog-
nition functions, as well as parts of the frequency range of a long-range radar, active
PAA for radar and radio interception, and probably another slit antenna array for
long-range radar.
Common frequency converters convert analog signals from antennas that pass
through the RF communication network into digital signals of a common interme-
diate frequency (IF), which are then fed through the IF communication network to
a regular structure from receiving modules. A small number of types of receiving
modules process signals and convert them into digital data in the form of quadra-
ture components, which are then transmitted via an optoelectronic communication
network to signal processing processors. For some signals, it was assumed that
preprocessing of digital signals may be required before they are submitted to the
signal processing processors of the integrated processing core. However, due to the
high performance of modern signal processing tools, the preprocessing function may
become unnecessary.
Signal transmission channels contain multifunctional modulators and transmitting
frequency converters, also connected by communication networks.
By 1994, McDonnell Douglas, Boeing, Lockheed Martin firms completed the
creation of integrated airborne equipment for the Pave Pace program. The center of
avia-electronic systems of the USAF, continuing work on the program, in 1997–98
conducted laboratory tests and demonstrations. It was planned that airborne equip-
ment with a fully modular architecture, based on this program, was put into operation
in 2005 [15].
Let us dwell on the design principles used in the creation of integrated airborne
avionics. The new architecture of avionics is most consistent with the principle of
aggregation—the construction of equipment from unified functional and constructive
units of repeated use [16]. As such units, at the level of which redundancy and recon-
figuration are conducted, functional–constructive modules (FCMs) were chosen. The
division into modules is done in such a way that, on the one hand, they are finished
devices that are large enough to create a simple reconfiguration procedure, and on
the other hand, they are rather small and cheap for repeated use in equipment in order
to achieve the required reliability. Typical FCM is presented in Fig. 2.2.
Thus, each of the integrated equipment systems includes several general-purpose
FCMs and one or several special FCMs, whose functions are determined by the
characteristics of a particular system.
In order to create aggregated airborne equipment, all types of US Armed Forces
carry out both independent and joint programs for the unification of FKM. Standard-
ization and unification are carried out under the direction of the planning service of
the US DoD, providing the required measures to coordinate the review of standards
by all branches of the Armed Forces.
When developing single-function airborne equipment since the 1950s of the last
century, the concept of units replaced in the flight unit line replaceable units (LRUs)
is used in all countries. This concept was adopted, among other things, in the develop-
ment of the avionics of domestic aircraft, the Western European aircraft EFA 2000
and the French Rafale. When developing an integrated avionics system, the LRU
concept is replaced by the concept of replaceable line replaceable modules (LRMs).
US Navy since 1984 conducts the Standard Hardware Acquisition and Reliability
Program (SHARP) standardization program, within which aspects of the layout of
electronic weapon systems are discussed, allowing them to increase their reliability
and operational manufacturability and reduce the cost of the life cycle [16]. The
SHARP is a further development of the standard electronic module (SEM) program.
Since 1966 as part of the SEM program, more than 10 million standard modules
were released, mostly used in shipboard equipment. SEM modules supply several
dozen companies. By providing a sufficient number of competing suppliers and a
significant volume of output, the prices for the modules were reduced by about 70%
from the original level. The low cost and high reliability of SEM made it possible to
abandon their repair in the event of a malfunction and thereby simplify and cheapen
the operation of the equipment.
For placement in VLSI modules, as well as to take into account the needs of the
developers of aviation airborne equipment, the Navy provided for the SHARP to
increase the number of conclusions by more than six times and increase the order
of magnitude of the module area. The format of the SHARP modules is compatible
with the format of the SEM and standard avionics module (SAM), SAM equipment
developed by ARINC for the Air Force. Within the framework of the Pave Pillar
program, new FCMs of the SEM-E type, 150 × 150 × 15 mm in size, were developed.
It is considered that the refusal to repair the module is expedient at a ratio of the
cost of the module to its average time between failures less than $ 10 per hour [4].
In the integrated airborne equipment, this ratio is much less.
Thus, in the USA, the development of the architecture of airborne avionics of
military aircraft is logically connected with the achieved scientific, technical and
technological achievements and ensures their use with the greatest efficiency. This
process is supported by organizational actions and financial resources, but is generally
aimed at reducing the cost of creating each aviation REC and reducing operating costs
during the aircraft’s life cycle.
2.1.3 Requirements for Military Integrated Electronic

Equipment
In the process of implementing military programs for integrating avionics and elec-
tronic equipment of other mobile equipment, developers of equipment and system
integrators formed general ideas about the requirements for integrated equipment.
Analysis of a number of works in this area allows us to distinguish the following
requirements, which the architecture of the integrated equipment of a military vehicle
must meet:
• modular design of hardware and software;
• suitability for the entire pre-allocated fleet of mobile vehicles;
• reduction of costs and development time;
• horizontal integration;
• availability of a technology update mechanism;
• redundancy and failsafe;
• maintainability;
• flexibility;
• scalability;
• decrease in volume and weight.
2.1.3.1 The Modular Principle of the Construction of Equipment

and Software
The main task regarding this architecture is the development of a library of standard
hardware and software modules and standard interfaces that can provide the imple-
mentation of certain functions in future integrated mobile devices. This is achieved
by dividing the functional and operational requirements for the functional connection
of the modules of the hardware and software, which are connected to each other by
standard interfaces defined in the interface control documents. Due to the presence
of installed interfaces, standard modules can always be developed and added to the
library of standard modules without prejudice to existing modules.
2.1.3.2 Suitability for All Dedicated Fleet of Mobile Vehicles
Standard modules are developed for direct use throughout the fleet of mobile vehicles,
and since hardware and software modules are defined on the basis of functions and
interfaces, they are virtually independent of each other. This approach provides a
standard integrated structure based on serial and parallel buses, power distribution
and control data. Based on the establishment of requirements for mobile equipment,
when integrating, standard hardware and software modules are selected from the
library, and using a modular construction method, it is possible to fully ensure that
operational and functional requirements are met. In the case when the library does not
have the required module, the integrator can always develop a new standard module
using the design methods defined in the architecture guide.
2.1.3.3 Reduced Development Costs and Time
The use of standard modules for the entire fleet of moving vehicles reduces the costs
of the development process and the cost of logistics for a large number of users. The
time and cost of developing new tools are also reduced, since most of the modules
come from the common library of standard modules. The only thing that remains
after defining the requirements and selecting the modules is the development of new
modules as necessary. Their number will decrease as the library of standard modules
will increase.
2.1.3.4 Horizontal Integration
An analysis of the operational requirements for mobile vehicle showed the impor-
tance of the interaction between the crew and its mobile vehicle. A lot of time is
spent by the crew in the existing means of choosing the integration and processing
the sensor data of this means with a very short time to control the task. The task of
the integrated architecture for a mobile vehicle is to reduce the crew’s workload by
performing machine integration of the required tasks in order to increase the crew’s
ability to manage the vehicle and give it more time to devote to managing combat
operations.
In the integrated equipment architecture, this goal is achieved through a distributed
network of intelligent nodes, standard interfaces and communication software, which
ensures the execution of application programs at any node with simultaneous selec-
tion of functions of any other node at any time. New nodes can be added with
full access to all existing nodes. Crew members can have access to any node of
any subsystem of the vehicle or select a separate function from the integrated bus
network and intelligent processing nodes. The additional use of artificial intelligence
will allow even more to increase the ability of the crew to successfully manage the
fighting.
2.1.3.5 Technology Update Mechanism
The obsolescence of combat systems is very large. As the complexity of combat

systems increases, the time and cost of their development increase. In many cases,
the system becomes technologically obsolete during operation. A good architecture
should be resistant to technological wear and tear and suitable for the introduction
of new functions at any time during the development process or throughout the
operation of the system in order to improve efficiency and reliability in operation.
This architecture should also allow the system to adapt to changes or take advantage
of modern technology. A powerful means of providing a mechanism for updating
technology is a network of standard modules and the definition of a control interface.
As noted earlier, each module is a functionally autonomous element that integrates
with other modules through standard interfaces. Any module can be modified without
affecting another module, and new modules can be developed at any time to improve
performance or to use improved technology or to reduce the mass, volume and power
consumption of existing modules. Modern standard interfaces guarantee successful
operation of newly developed modules when combined with existing modules.
2.1.3.6 Redundancy and Failover
Mobile assets developed for operation on enemy advance lines require a high degree
of reliability, which can rarely be obtained without the use of backup elements.
Although this may be very necessary from the point of view of the operational
readiness of the system, in some cases, redundancy is to some extent impractical

because of the considerable expense, weight and volume.
The integrator must be able to choose full, partial reservation or lack of it,
depending on the individual conditions. The modular nature of the integrated equip-
ment allows you to select the number and type of modules from the standard library
to provide for failover and redundancy requirements.
2.1.3.7 Maintainability
The operational readiness of the mobile means directly depends on the ideology of
maintenance of the means associated with the ideology of designing its equipment and
the built-in controls (BIT). The architecture of the integrated equipment, providing a
high degree of modular construction and data processing and distribution resources,
creates airborne conditions for prediction, embedded monitoring and diagnostics.
Combining such architectural properties will fully provide the concept of two-tier
maintenance, which serves to reduce costs over the life cycle.
2.1.3.8 Flexibility
Increasing demands on the characteristics of mobile assets and cost reduction lead to
the need to develop architectures of “customized mobile assets.” Standard interfaces,
decomposition and placement of functions in certain standard modules give this
architecture a high degree of flexibility in the event of changes in requirements and
the introduction of new technology.
2.1.3.9 Expansion Effect
The versatility of the architecture should provide horizontal integration when creating
new nodes that meet the requirements for processing a large data stream or the
requirements for functional changes of the subsystem without any changes that are
required for existing electronic means. When existing standard modules are not
enough, new modules can be developed to meet new requirements that do not affect
existing modules.
2.1.3.10 Reduced Volume and Weight
Mass and volume are critical elements for any remedy. The architecture of the inte-
grated equipment should strive to reduce the mass and volume, facilitating the inter-
action mechanisms between sensors, data processing elements and interfaces. This
architecture should reduce the number of connections between nodes and simplify
the power distribution system. A reduction in volume and mass can be obtained using
standard modules made on VLSI. In addition, the distributed architecture of equip-

ment allows the sharing of common resources among multiple consumers, reducing
the need for special resources.
2.1.4 Integrated Airborne Activity Avionics in Western

Europe
The development of aviation instrument making in Western European countries over

the past 20 years has taken the path of combining previously independent single-
function airborne equipment into integrated equipment systems. This growing inte-
gration has led to huge costs for testing and integration, dramatically increasing the
costs of developing, acquiring and operating avionics. As a result, avionics-producing
countries recognized that national development in the field of aviation is no longer
possible. Modern airplanes and helicopters in Western Europe are now being built in
international consortia that take into account not only technical and conceptual, but
also economic and political criteria. These criteria have an impact not only on the
implementation of avionics systems, but also on the development of concepts and,
accordingly, on development processes: National funding shares should be turned,
as far as possible, into national development shares. On this path, there are artificial
barriers that oppose a clear systematic approach.
In order to harmonize national approaches to avionics in Western Europe, a
number of multinational initiatives and programs were undertaken in the 1990s
[17]. The context also includes the actions of the NATO-created three-nation Union
Council for the Standard Avionics Architecture Allied Standard Avionics Architec-
ture Council (ASAAC), whose members are France, Great Britain and Germany.
ASAAC is supported by the USA.
ASAAC activities consisted of two phases. During phase I (1990–1994), an archi-
tectural model was developed for military modular avionics [17]. During phase II,
which lasted five years, which began in November 1997, standards for European
modular avionics were developed and substantiated by demonstration. Both govern-
ment agencies and large manufacturers of avionics participate in the activities of
ASAAC.
Phase II of the ASAAC program is aimed at proving that modular avionics devel-
oped according to the ASAAC standards after 2015 will bring the necessary improve-
ment in technical performance with a significant reduction in costs. Stage 1 of phase
II completed in 1998 served primarily to refine the architectural models in terms
of their feasibility. In addition, concepts were developed for the architecture as a
whole, as well as for the special aspects of software, the types of standard modules,
the network and the placement of standard modules in racks. At the end of stage
1, these concepts created the first draft for architecture standards, which should be
confirmed with a demonstration. At the same time, demonstration scenarios were
developed.
Stage 2 of phase II serves to implement the concept developed at stage 1, i.e.,

demonstrations. The purpose of the demonstrations is to prove that the ASAAC
standards can be met, or draft standards should be finalized. Draft standards in 2003
were submitted to the competent commission on standardization.
At the heart of the IMA integrated modular avionics concept, developed by
ASAAC, is the creation of a data processing center in the form of a rack (cabinet)
containing hardware components in the form of a small number of LRM types. The
modules and the rack are connected to each other through a high-speed data bus
and/or through a high-bandwidth network mechanism. The software architecture
also follows a modular principle.
Hardware and software modules are adapted to function for solving specific tasks,
which is called profile use. Regarding the profound use of modular components, the
core can be reconfigured, as a result of which the required high degree of availability
is achieved, and the number of failures of all equipment can be significantly reduced
during operation.
It is believed that as a result of standardization for modular avionics, a standard
will appear on the dimensions and the device connecting the module to the rack, so
that it is possible to make possible the use of modules within the aircraft squadron and
for different types of aircraft, as well as the use of modules from different suppliers.
The architectural model IMA, developed within the framework of ASAAC,
focuses on a multi-level model of virtual computer software, similar to the basic
reference model of OSI open system interconnection [18].
At the top level are applications, among which there are:
• functional applications that provide “own” functions of avionics;
• special system applications that perform at the system-level control and navigation
functions.
The combination of functional and system applications is specific to air transport.
Below, the applications are the modules—the components of the architecture that
should be used in profile, that is, also regardless of the specific type of aircraft:
• operating system layer (OSL) operating system, which consists of a real-time oper-
ating system, as well as extensions for the coherent virtual channel management
(VCM) and common generic system management (GSM) functions. GSM func-
tions operate at the module level in the rack. Application access to service at the
operating system level is provided by the APOS interface (APplication/Operating
System).
• Level of support modules module support layer (MSL). It provides both access
to specific modular equipment and access to the communication network of the
modules. The operating system layer also provides access to the modules through
the module/operating system (MOS) interface and network access via the network-
independent interface (NII).
The ASAAC system architecture provides the following types of modules:

• data processor (DP);
• signal processor (SP);
• graphics processing (GP);
• network switching (NS);
• high capacity memory (MMM).
An important integration tool is the system configuration tables. The tables contain
a formal image of the attributes that describe the system elements of the applications
(software), the hardware part (resources) and the integrated system. In the process of
developing a system, configuration tables are used to comprehend software require-
ments in applications and map them to hardware capabilities, which, for their part,
are presented in resource tables.
For each possible use state, one configuration should be made. Using tables, this
process should be at least partially automated, for which a special software tool should
be developed. During the life cycle, the set of permissible system configurations,
as well as the necessary sequences of transitions between them, are recorded in
configuration tables and are transmitted in a suitable format to the life cycle support
system. The tables are embedded in the hardware management software and used to
configure or, if necessary, reconfigure the equipment. The latter may be necessary
when changing the task, moving to another phase of the task or due to module failures.
Western European manufacturers have high hopes for integrated modular avionics
in terms of meeting operational and technological requirements in military aviation.
However, there are problems associated with all integrated equipment programs.
These include, in particular, [8]:
• transparency of airborne avionics technology development;
• durability of standards;
• open standards;
• the possibility of standards of integrated airborne avionics contributes to the
effective creation of projects;
• ensuring performance;
• qualification and certification;
• life cycle payback.
The transparency of airborne avionics technology development includes two aspects:

• development of integrated equipment, including updating or improving its
characteristics at various points in the life cycle;
• development of technology, introducing technological innovations with minimal
refinement of equipment in order to support its development or minimize the costs
of life cycle support.
Transparency is an important point, since the speed of development of several
generations of new components technologically lies within the service life of mili-
tary self-summer. For example, VLSI performance of data processors doubles every
18 months, and often hardware designs are released that become obsolete before they
go into service.
The main goal of the technology transparency is to ensure that when a new compo-
nent technology is combined with already existing airborne equipment, the costs of
adjusting documentation and software would be significantly reduced and product
interchangeability would be preserved.
The durability of standards is considered as a necessary condition for the creation
of integrated airborne equipment. Standards should play a large role in ensuring inter-
changeability and interaction in the creation of modules by various manufacturers for
a long time. It is considered [8] that the life span of standards for integrated equipment
should be at least 40 years. At the same time, long-term standards should ensure the
possibility of innovations, creating the freedom of choice for manufacturers when
introducing new approaches, methods, materials and components.
Integrated airborne equipment standards are needed to enable the system inte-
grator and equipment user to select module suppliers, allowing alternative options
for individual module designs. Standards must allow flexible purchasing choices so
that development can be based on supplier performance, cost and delivery schedule.
Open standards should define how properties such as interchangeability and top
compatibility can be tested. Standards should work together as an integrated set of
documents and, if necessary, include previously released standards.
Developers of integrated airborne equipment must be sure that standards ensure, or
at least do not impede, the effective management of all aspects of equipment develop-
ment at all its stages. Interface standards and specifications of characteristics should
also enable the development of equipment and the improvement of problem-solving
characteristics in order to meet the planned product improvement. An important part
of this process is to provide integrated airborne equipment with the ability to adjust
software during the life cycle of the aircraft.
Airborne equipment manufacturers are also concerned with ensuring performance
in specified operating conditions. The task of the wartime established by ASAAC
for integrated equipment is to maintain 95% readiness for 30 days in harsh envi-
ronmental conditions at a distance from service centers without ground support.
The corresponding peacetime task is to minimize the 95% equipment availability
within 150 flight hours without maintenance. If we take into account only hardware,
then, although the increase in reliability of the main electronic components will
continue, the rate of progress in this area is rather small and depends on a significant
number of complex physical and mechanical factors. Therefore, the fulfillment of
the requirements should be sought in the path of architectural solutions.
When considering issues of qualification and certification, there is a signifi-
cant difference between single-function and integrated airborne equipment. Single-
function airborne equipment qualifies at the “black box” level, which contains elec-
tronic components, an operating system and application software. This black box is
placed in the appropriate rack or on the stack, and the manufacturer is responsible
for the level of equipment within the agreed installation. In the case of integrated
equipment, a set of modules and an operating system are placed in the rack (cabinet)
belonging to the aircraft, which now need to be qualified. The system integrator will
be responsible for the level of all equipment.
When discussing the life cycle costs of an integrated airborne avionics, it is recog-
nized that this is one of the areas that are still in the field of art, not science. But since
the reduction of expenses has been announced as one of the main advantages of inte-
grated avionics, it is important to understand what the costs will be. As follows from
[19], it is believed that after the development of integrated equipment, the cost of its
acquisition and operation can be reduced by 15% and 40%, respectively, for a single
project of integrated equipment. It is also possible to further reduce costs if the order
of equipment supply changes during the creation of multinational projects, which
will reduce the traditional costs of national projects for the air force, army and navy.
Only in this way can the high costs of developing integrated airborne equipment be
returned.
On the whole, an analysis of the work on creating an ideology for building inte-
grated airborne avionics in the countries of Western Europe shows that approaches
similar to the USA are used to this task. At the same time, it can be noted that in the
medium term, the IMA concept is not expected to be used for the modernization of
already operated Tornado, Mirage, Eurofighter aircraft.
2.2 The Concept of Integrated Modular Avionics ARINC

Company
2.2.1 Development Goals and Integration Tasks
Most foreign and many types of modern Russian aircraft are equipped with airborne
equipment that complies with the specifications and recommendations of the Inter-
national Committee of Electronic Equipment Engineers of Airlines Electronic Engi-
neering Committee (AEEC), which is a working body of ARINC (Aeronautical
Radio, Inc., USA). In particular, the ARINC 700 Series specifications for digital
pilotage and navigation equipment contain recommendations on the main func-
tions of airborne avionics, technical characteristics, design, interchangeability, etc.
Thus, ARINC documents serve as the basis for the unification and standardization
of airborne equipment for international civil aviation.
ARINC has developed the concept of integrated modular avionics (IMA), the
basics of which are outlined in the ARINC 651 report “Guidelines for the design of
integrated modular avionics” [20]. The document represents the agreed opinion of
representatives of airlines, manufacturers of airplanes and avionics of the USA and
a number of other foreign countries. It was the basis of a whole series of ARINC
documents on IMA (ARINC 624, 629, 636, 637, 650, 652, 653, 659, etc.).
The ARINC 651 document is an IMA design guide that should replace the ARINC
700 Series equipment. It covers the following questions:
• the purpose of the creation and implementation of IMA;

• technology used;
• fault tolerance;
• data network;
• IMA architecture;
• software architecture;
• attitude to certification;
• testability and maintainability;
• sources and consumers of data;
• technical specifications for the core processor.
The need for an IMA is justified by the perceived benefits of this development:
(a) for airlines—reduced life cycle cost, achieved by:
• improved performance;
• reduced mass of an unloaded aircraft;
• increased paid payload;
• reduce unplanned maintenance;
• reducing the need for spare parts;
• simplified service with changes and additions of service in avionics during the
life cycle.
(b) for aircraft manufacturers—reduced initial cost and the cost of supporting the
aircraft during the service life by:
• reduced cost of development, production and certification;
• reduced avionics weight and increased payload;
• flexibility in terms of effectively meeting customer requirements and innovations.
(c) for avionics suppliers—improved marketing of components and subsystems
through:
• increased trading volume;
• long-term output;
• flexibility in effectively meeting customer requirements.
(d) for the certification authority, the ability to qualify the climate and functional
components of the equipment, regardless of the operating conditions of the aircraft,
thanks to the standard IMA layout. The required certification of the intended functions
of the aircraft and its systems will be simplified.
Operational objectives are:
• the introduction of a new ideology of maintenance, which is expressed in the
ability to delay it until the aircraft returns to the main base;
• reduction or elimination of false signals about failures due to the use of improved
diagnostics;
• the possibility of upgrading airborne avionics and adding new functions by
changing the software on board the aircraft.
2.2 The Concept of Integrated Modular Avionics ARINC Company 51
With given functional characteristics and operational safety, the main criterion by
which to judge airborne avionics is the cost of ownership (life cycle cost—LCC). The
reduction of one cost factor and the neglect of others is unacceptable. It is especially
unreasonable to give preference to reducing the cost of development in relation to
the further LCC.
The task of integration is to create a boring equipment design that ensures
maximum use of distributed resources to reduce reservance to a minimum. Inte-
gration should be offered only where it is guaranteed that a gain in the LCC is
guaranteed by reducing the cost of acquisition, the need for redundancy, and the
mass and volume of equipment.
The following fault tolerance tasks are formulated:
• At a minimum, for all functions that may affect the reliable operation of commer-
cial aircraft, failure insensitivity to failures should be provided. This provi-
sion should be used as a design criterion for determining the architecture of
airborne avionics, the required level of failure-stability and the definition of
systems—candidates for integration.
• For a fully fault-tolerant REC set, the warning time for the need for maintenance
should be at least 15,000 h for a single function. Moreover, it is desirable that all
the functions of the REC continue to function with a probability of 0.99 for 200 h
after the first failure.
• The entire avionics architecture should be aimed at ensuring the reliability of each
of its functions. This applies to all satellite systems, including sensors and aircraft
installation of cables.
Integration technology should provide:
• creation of standard interchangeable modules, which will reduce the total cost of
a set of airline spare parts;
• reducing the mass and volume of avionics without degrading the thermal modes
of operation;
• ensuring the flexibility of equipment placement on a self-summer;
• interchangeability of modules from different manufacturers.
2.2.2 IMA Architecture
According to ARINC 651, the basic principle of IMA is a systematic approach to the
design of avionics, which takes into account modern concepts of system partitioning,
modularity, functionality and insensitivity to failures. Traditionally, an airborne REC
includes sensors (measuring or controlling equipment operating in real time), actua-
tors (drivers), indicators and processors (equipment used for processing digital data)
that provide the implementation of large numbers of relevant functions. In the tradi-
tional architecture, sensors, actuators and indicators are not used by several systems.
The IMA approach should promote the concentration of functions in avionics without
the limitations imposed by physical boundaries. This will allow the use of sensors,
Simple sensors
Control and and/or actuators
display devices
ARINC 629 compatible Remote Data Hub

Cabinet 1 RF converter
sensor
ARINC 629 global bus
ARINC 629 compatible

actuator Cabinet n
Local
input/output
Fig. 2.5 IMA equipment architecture
actuators and indicators for the implementation of many functions. An IMA can
cover many of the existing aircraft systems and, ultimately, all systems.
The IMA system includes a series of cabinets that contain equipment that performs
most of the processing and any local input–output from sensors, drives and indicators.
Cabinets are connected with each other and with remote drives, sensors and indicators
via the ARINC 629 data bus, as shown in Fig. 2.5.
The main task of IMA is to develop such equipment that meets the regulatory
certification requirements. Depending on the architecture, the approach to integration
and the number of integrated airborne systems, a certain level of fault tolerance may
be required to meet these requirements.
A high degree of project integrity is required to meet airworthiness requirements.
In addition, airline companies suggest that aviation systems demonstrate a high
degree of availability, even for systems that do not work in critical flight conditions.
This approach will make a positive contribution to ensuring the effective safety of
aircraft operations in a competitive industry. At a minimum, resiliency should be
provided for all functions that can increase the reliability of commercial operations.
This should be used as a criterion for developing the system architecture of the
required level of fault tolerance and determining possible systems for integration.
In order for the systems implemented in the IMA cabinet to meet the requirements
of their integrity, the cabinet must be provided with facilities to unify the differences.
These differences can be noted at the software level, or at the hardware level, or both.
A high degree of integrity is recommended for all IMA equipment.
It should be noted that the internal architecture of the cabinets, even on the same
aircraft, may differ depending on the diversity, complexity and criticality of the
functions of each of the cabinets.
Equipment is distributed on board the aircraft in such a way as to minimize the

cost of the life cycle of self-flight. There are two main types of equipment that should
be taken into account: cabinets and remote components.
The location of the cabinets can be established after analyzing the advantages of
ease of placement, depending on proximity to the sensors and actuators. Require-
ments for the input and output data of the cabinet can influence the choice of its loca-
tion. Proper equipment placement leads to savings in installation length, connectors
and manufacturing costs. Such tasks that are strictly carried out in the software can
be solved in the closet anywhere on board the aircraft. It is also practical to have one
cabinet that provides data input and output for neighboring sensors and transfers this
data to another cabinet. Such an approach can significantly reduce aircraft assembly.
If the cabinet contains gateways as inputs and outputs, the cabinet can be placed
in any place where it is most convenient for maintenance personnel.
Remote electronics is introduced into the appropriate devices by practical solu-
tions. Other devices can be controlled by remote data hubs that serve a number of
physically closely located devices. Remote data hubs should be located at convenient
points in relation to devices and convenient for maintenance personnel. Where none
of the above choices are possible, I/O devices must be placed in a cabinet.
The developer must take into account the possibility of placing the main equip-
ment IMA in the cockpit, on the cabin wall or the cabin ceiling and in other areas
that are not used for the payload, and, in addition, are acceptable for maintenance.
Sensor equipment associated with antennas and other remote electronics can be
placed directly inside the fuselage surface. Modern aircraft, except for aircraft flying
over long distances, in all likelihood should be limited in volume rather than in mass.
Currently, the use of potentially expensive cargo volume for bulk racks of avionics
with the full implementation of IMA may be terminated.
Equipment with a low time between failures (MTBF) compared to other equip-
ment should be mounted with easy access. In all cases, an analysis should be made
of the time required to replace each replaceable LRU or LRM in its place of location.
Equipment with an estimated high MTBF may be located in restricted areas, where
the frequency of calls associated with the time required to replace a unit is within
acceptable limits. Equipment with a high MTBF can be mounted in such a way as
to include an “acceptable level of difficulty” for remote equipment. For equipment
with a known high MTBF, special equipment removal tools or locking mechanisms
can be used.
IMA systems are likely to exist for a long period of time, during which many
technological developments may emerge that will improve the modular design. These
developments are likely to occur at different times for different modules. Therefore,
it is necessary to accurately determine the boundaries of the elements and guarantees
that these elements are closely related to each other.
For compatibility of equipment, standards for digital interfaces ARINC 629 and
ARINC 659 have been developed. These standards allow developing, designing
and qualifying equipment regardless of the remaining parts of the system until the
function is integrated with other modules of the system.
2.2.3 System Components and Main Functional IMA

Modules
The usual components required for the implementation of airborne functions are
control devices, sensors, actuators, indicators and processing devices needed to
convert data into a form suitable for the operation of drives and indicators. The
IMA system considers these components as separate physical bodies that are linked
to each other by a network of data buses. Another goal of IMA equipment is to
optimize the space to handle many functions in order to reduce costs.
Considering the above components, the IMA system includes:
• cabinets with backplane and modules;
• data buses (ARINC 629 and ARINC 429);
• devices compatible with ARINC 629;
• data hubs compatible with ARINC 629 buses.
The purpose of the cabinet is to provide computing resources and interfaces neces-
sary for the software of all applications that are located in the cabinet. The cabinet
consists of three main elements—the cabinet structure, a backplane and functional
modules.
The design of the cabinet provides mechanical and electrical conditions for the
installation of a group of functional modules and forms the connections between these
modules and the aircraft body. The overall dimensions of the cabinet are flexible
so that manufacturers can combine different modules in a particular building of
the aircraft. The design of the cabinets is likely to be specific in order to be able
to withstand different external conditions. This allows maximum flexibility when
placing cabinets on the plane.
The cabinet also contains a physical unifying pad that communicates between the
functional modules and the rest of the airborne equipment. This joint panel can be
divided into three zones. The first zone connects the aircraft assembly to the physical
combiner panel. The second zone is designed to transfer all intermodular data; that
is, it is a backplane bus. The third zone is used for power distribution. The ARINC
659 backplane data transfer bus is an important functional element of the cabinet.
Cabinet design is the responsibility of the system integrator. They must be the
manufacturer of the aircraft. Each cabinet can provide a failsafe environment. Func-
tions should be distributed in cabinets based on I/O requirements, memory band-
width and memory requirements, as well as their interaction with other functions.
The cabinet must comply with the ARINC 650 specification sections and RTCA
DO-160 standards. The cabinet itself provides the basic mechanical structure for the
installation of modules with external control and insulation. There are no electrical
devices in the cabinet, such as power conversion and adjustment, control and moni-
toring buses. These devices are made in the form of separate replaceable modules
LRM, which serve the functions of avionics.
Functional modules are assembled into LRM modules in accordance with the
recommendations of the ARINC 650 specification “Interfaces and Layout of Inte-
grated Modular Aviation Equipment.” The purpose of IMA is that the airborne inter-
faces are also common to most modules or rebuilt so that a number of modules and
their location in the cabinet do not need to be fixed during the development of the
aircraft, but allowed to introduce changes and additional functions during operation,
without changing cabinet and airborne installation costs. The power supply module
provides power to other cabinet modules.
The functional structure of the cabinet is shown in Fig. 2.6. It includes the
following functional modules:
• core processor;
• standard input–output module;
• special input–output module;
• power supply module;
• bus bridge;
• gateway;
• mass memory.
Since all functions work together, these modules must be compatible. Therefore,
it is necessary to accurately determine the static aspects of the interface, including
ARINC 629 backplane data bus
Power bus
Special Standard data

Power Gateway Core Purpose Data input / output
Source processor Input /
Output
Bus Mass
bridge memory
Aircraft power Input / output
supply
ARINC 629 global data buses
Fig. 2.6 Functional structure of the IMA cabinet

the definition of the connector, the output pins and their characteristics, and charac-
teristics of the signals. The level of redundancy, providing, in particular, aspects of
the resiliency of the cabinet, affects compatibility. Consequently, it is necessary to
determine the level of required reserve in order to ensure that each node complies
with the same standard.
The function of each module and the description of its interface with a unifying
panel are defined in separate ARINC specifications. This approach provides the
opportunity for the interaction of equipment developed and supplied by different
manufacturers. It also contributes to the compatibility of equipment. When the tran-
sition to a modular design occurs, it will be easier to develop, certify, test and
maintain.
The internal level of equipment redundancy is determined during the development
and reflects the requirements of the market. The system integrator should evaluate
the capabilities of the module with respect to system requirements and make the
appropriate choice.
2.2.3.1 Core Processor
Core processors provide computing power for the cabinet. The cabinet can contain
one or a number of processors along with their memory and any circuits necessary for
managing the reserve, for example, monitors, built-in control (BITE) and isolation
circuits. An alternative kernel module based on cabinet applications can be used in
the IMA concept.
To perform multiple functions, the kernel processor must provide the means to
protect these functions in order to ensure that none of the functions can adversely
affect the other. These isolation tools must be non-visible to application software.
The implementation of each system determines how many processors and how
many different projects should be used. The development of a core processor should
facilitate independent implementation in order to achieve proper compatibility with
the computing core of another cabinet, ensuring consistency between the cores of
the cabinets.
Application software can be loaded into any core processors in a cabinet, the
design of which should be hardware transparent for applications. Software must
be developed in accordance with the ARINC 652 “Aviation Equipment Software
Development Guide” and Sect. 7 of the ARINC 651.
2.2.3.2 Standard I/O Module
Standard I/O modules are designed to convert a standard set of data types of analog
and discrete sensors into digital form for transmission to the core processors via the
backplane bus or vice versa. Each module can contain interfaces for one type of
signal or some optimal mixture of signals.
Standardizing I/O modules will facilitate efficient data collection for transfer to
processing modules via the backplane bus. Standardization of a separate I/O module
should take into account the means for reconfiguration. The I/O module can be
configured using application software that meets the requirements of the cabinet.
This configuration can be stored in the memory of an I/O module.
2.2.3.3 Data Bus Interface Module
The aircraft data transmission medium is a highly specialized communication

network that manages the flow of data from numerous sensors in real time. This
data is processed with the priority necessary to ensure the guaranteed safety of the
aircraft. Network protocols are based on the OSI reference model and are used to facil-
itate communication between processes occurring in different computing elements
connected to different data buses in local area networks (LANs) and other means of
communication. This network transmission concept ensures communication between
users of communication systems. Messages can be received from one end system
and sent to another end system, for example, from an airborne central maintenance
system to a centralized service station, the distances of thousands of miles between
which will be passed through different physical data links with full transparency for
end users.
Typical data links include, in particular, satellite communications (SATCOM),
mode S transponder and Aeronautical VHF Packet Communication Equipment
(AVPAC), which are part of the Aeronautical Telecommunication Network (ATN).
The need for communication between the aircraft’s airborne systems and ground-
based systems, as well as between various systems on board the aircraft, is obvious
and ever-increasing. For systems based on IMA, the primary task is to create a
transparent mechanism for the interaction of end users, regardless of whether these
consumers are on board the aircraft or on the ground. When implementing the neces-
sary protocol for interoperability between the two networks, standard procedures
will need to be created to ensure user transparency. The AEEC adapted OSI standard
protocols for interworking between ground and airborne networks.
The provision of interworking in the ATN environment, in which various networks
of computing devices that use OSI protocols interact, is illustrated in Fig. 2.7. Compli-
ance with International Organization for Standardization (ISO) ensures compatibility
of various networks of computing devices. Applying the principles of OSI network
sharing has the following objectives:
• meet the requirements of communication equipment with characteristics of
different levels;
• allow the transition to a new technology;
• to ensure development, productivity and interchangeability;
• connect existing networks located outside the aircraft;
• ensure that communication structures comply with resiliency and coordination
capabilities.
Onboard Ground
system system
IMA Cabinet Main ground
Terrestrial Internet computer
Application connecting the host Application
Representation computer to the Representation
ground station for
Session transmission to an Session
IMA cabinet
Broadcast or CMU airplane Broadcast
Connected ATN Router ATN Router Connected

function function
Internet Internet Internet Internet Internet
ISO N ISO SN
629/LAN N
8208
SN SN Subnet
629/LAN 8208
channel channel Channel L L
… L L Channel
Physical level level level
P P P P P P
Physical
level
~
~
«Air – Ground»channel
Fig. 2.7 ATN
A high level of integration in the IMA system requires communication between

different airborne systems and their subsystems. Some systems that depend on the
work of others or are located in the same zone naturally form a network group. These
groups connect to other systems in a network group or separately.
As a result, there is a need for a mechanism of interaction between networks.
Depending on the various characteristics of networks that need to interact, a number
of interaction methods can be used. Figure 2.8 shows the different methods of
interaction for computer networks.
Repeater Function
Repeater is the easiest mechanism for expanding the boundaries of such computer
networks. The repeater function must receive the message and then relay it,
amplifying the signal to its initial form.
Bridge Function
A bus with a bridge interaction physically separates networks that have different
physical layers and common channel and higher layers. The bridge receives all the
messages of each computer network that is part of it. The destination address is
checked, and when a message destined for a terminal on another network is recog-
nized, it is transmitted to that network. The bridge connection implements the func-
tion of storing and promoting data, since the messages are temporarily stored in the
bridge and then moved to another network. In the case of local area networks, the
Application
Representation
Session
Core Broadcast
processor
Network
as a bus
bridge Channel level
Physical Physical
level level
Network 1 Network 2
Application Application
Representation Representation
Session Session
System A Broadcast System A Broadcast
Core Core
Network Network
Processor Processor
Channel level Channel level
Physical level Physical level
(a) A bridge using the physical and link layers for the interconnection of networks 1 and 2 buses /
computers
OSI Levels
Interconnect Channel Network level
Physical level
Tool level and higher
Repeater same same same
Bridge different same same
Router different different same
Gateway different different different
(b) Definition of protocols for network interconnection methods
Fig. 2.8 Internetworking in IMA equipment
Higher levels Higher levels

ARINC 629 Physical level Physical level
ARINC 629
Fig. 2.9 Bridge function example
bridge is also able to distinguish some frame formats or other differences between
the two methods of controlling access to the medium. Figure 2.9 shows a simple
Network level Network level

ARINC 629 Physical level Physical level
ARINC 429
Fig. 2.10 Router function example
example of bridging two physically different ARINC 629 data buses. Only physical
and channel levels are needed to connect these buses.
Router Function
The router connects networks with different physical and link layers, but with a
common protocol for the network and higher layers. This function sends a message
through internode. When a message is sent through intermittent nodes, it must be
accompanied by two addresses. The first address is the address of the final destination
node and remains constant when the message crosses this network, and the second
address is the address of the next node on the route. This address changes as the
message moves from node to node along the route through the network. Figure 2.10
shows an example of laying a route over an ARINC 429 data bus when paired with
an ARINC 629. In this case, three lower levels are needed to connect different types
of data buses.
Gateway Function
The highest level of internetworking is the gateway (internetwork interface).

The gateway provides the flexibility needed to connect computer networks with
completely different architectures and different protocols. Typical gateway functions
include a message format protocol and address translation and protocol conversion.
Figure 2.11 shows an example of a connection between completely different commu-
nication systems, such as the X.25 packet switching network and the ARINC 429
data transmission bus. To ensure application interconnections, protocols of all OSI
layers are required.
The developer of the IMA system must consider all data bus interfaces in the
cabinet. In order to be able to develop the functionality of a cabinet or a modular
technology, gateways should be used to convert protocols from different data lines.
The TIP-Personal Gateway will provide conversion of the ARINC 629 bus protocol
to the ARINC 659 bus protocol and vice versa.
Application Application
Broadcast Broadcast
Network level Network level
Packet switching Channel level Channel level
network X.25 ARINC 429
Physical level Physical level
Fig. 2.11 Gateway function example
2.2.3.4 Synchronous I/O Module
A synchronous I/O module exchanges data between the I/O modules and the core
processor, as required by the application (i.e., the transmissions are synchronous with
the application). The module performs data collection, preprocessing and storage of
data blocks in accordance with the requirements of the application to the cabinet.
Each application configures the I/O for its own use immediately after determining
the cabinet configuration. After this, the preprocessing device must cyclically update
the memory allocated in each application. Thus, the same data can be found in the
memory of I/O modules in areas of a particular application.
2.2.3.5 Asynchronous I/O Module
When operating in asynchronous mode, the exchange between the I/O modules and
the core processor is initiated by the I/O module. These transmissions are asyn-
chronous with respect to this application. Asynchronous I/O modules provide data
acquisition, preprocessing and storage of data blocks for various applications used
in the cabinet.
When the cabinet configuration is defined, each application can inform the I/O
module of the required signal characteristics, for example, signal type, electrical
value–physical value conversion and signal refresh rate on the backplane.
After configuring and initializing the module, it must transfer all collected data
to the appropriate modules.
In the synchronous and asynchronous modes, the preliminary processing device
must be able to process data, for example, filter and convert it. In addition, it should be
possible to collect and store I/O signals. Processing characteristics should be loaded
in the same way as channel characteristics.
2.2.3.6 Special I/O Module
When the requirements for special types of signals or specific interfaces do not meet
the requirements for a standard I/O module, it is necessary to develop a special I/O
module. This should be done only when absolutely necessary, since in this case the
advantages of cost reduction through standardization cannot be realized.
2.2.3.7 Power Module
The power supply module provides airborne power conversion for powering other
consumer modules. A set of power modules in each cabinet must have a consistent
redundancy that meets the requirements for ensuring the integrity of the functions
placed in the cabinet. Input power to each cabinet power supply module should
normally be supplied from an independent source of standard airborne power supply
on the aircraft.
The output power from the power supply module must be of the same standard
voltage level. From the power supply module to each work module that are connected
to it, separate buses must be provided. These output buses must have independent
protection against failures, so that a fault in one module does not affect the integrity
of the operation of other modules.
User modules are usually connected to at least two power supply modules. Each
user module must automatically receive power from each of the two sources as
required by the functions of the module.
2.2.4 Backplane Bus
For intercom in the cabinet, the use of ARINC 659 serial data transmission lines is
recommended. The serial backplane bus has many advantages over the parallel data
transfer bus, including the minimum number of contacts and interconnects inside the
cabinet. This tire also provides exceptional architectural flexibility for highly critical
systems that may require multiple backplane busbars to meet integrity requirements.
The ARINC 659 data transfer bus is characterized by several parameters that ensure
interface compatibility: data transfer rate in bits, number of nodes supported, selec-
tion protocol, physical structure and message structure. These characteristics are
defined in the ARINC 659 “Backplane Data Link” specification.
2.2.5 Control and Maintenance Bus
For monitoring and maintenance, as well as loading program tables ARINC 659, the
use of a separate data bus is recommended. The recommended interface is defined
in IEEE-1149.5.
2.2.6 Flight Data Buses
The main airborne data bus is defined in the ARINC 629 “Multi-Transmitter Data
Bus” specification. The ARINC 629 bus is a serial bidirectional bus and is used to
transfer all data between cabinets, including critical data. The general requirements
for a system determine the number of tires required for a particular implementation.
In addition, for specific applications, where appropriate, ARINC 429 buses can
be used.
2.2.7 Devices Compatible with ARINC 629
Interfaces that communicate with the external environment, i.e., with sensors, actu-
ators and indicators, they can have remote electronic devices that perform level and
waveform matching, buffering, conversion and control of the lower level. These
remote devices can be inserted into devices such as drives and input and output data
converters to comply with ARINC 629. Incompatible devices can use remote data
hubs, as defined in Sect. 2.2.10.
2.2.8 Simple Appliances
Some peripheral devices may not be able to directly connect to the ARINC 629
bus. These devices are simple devices. It says nothing about the intrinsic complexity
of this device. They can produce raw data, or they can have a complex internal
processing process when performing level and waveform buffering, conversion and
lower-level control. Output data can be in analog or digital form other than ARINC
629. It is recommended that simple instruments be connected to data concentrators
for transmission over the ARINC 629 bus or directly connected to the cabinet via
standard I/O modules.
In the case where special types of signals are required or the requirements of a
specialized interface cannot be satisfied, the development of special airborne devices
may be required. This should be done only if there is no other practical solution. If
the arguments are economically justified, you should consider the total cost of the
aircraft, and not just the cost of this device.
2.2.9 Display Devices
Usually, ARINC 629 buses are required to communicate with display devices.
However, there may be some display architectures and economic reasons that may
lead to the use of alternative solutions. For example, some display devices can be
connected to cabinets with fast-acting video buses. This type of communication will
be necessary in the case when the cabinet designer chooses the integration of gener-
ational displays with graphic display in the cabinet equipment and the transfer of
video data to display devices. These displays will be serviced by special cabinet I/O
modules.
2.2.10 Remote Data Hubs
A remote data hub serves a number of simple devices nearby. As an input device, a
remote data hub converts data from analog, discrete or other form to digital format
ARINC 629 bus. As an output device, a remote data hub converts data from ARINC
629 format to analog, discrete or other form. A remote data hub may be responsible
for monitoring the status of simple devices associated with it.
2.2.11 RF Converters
Radio-electronic equipment of navigation, charging, communication, data exchange

and air traffic control is considered in ARINC 651 as radio frequency (RF) converters
connecting the airborne antennas to the ARINC 629 aircraft information bus system.
Some RF converters may have inputs or outputs in analog or digital form in addition
to the ARINC 629 bus (e.g., analog voice).
As a data source, RF converters process RF signals from the airborne antennas and
provide data in a functional format, usually without the need for further computational
processing. An example would be a GNSS receiver, the output of which provides
latitude, long-term, altitude, speed data on three coordinate axes and time.
As a receiver of RF data, converters can use independent data processing to trans-
form the functional data transmitted over the ARINC 629 bus into RF modulation
energy to be emitted by the corresponding side antenna. Some RF converters can be
either a source or a data receiver (DME).
RF converters can integrate their core RF functions with the airborne antenna
device and connect with the corresponding computing device through nonstandard
data connections (SATCOM equipment). In the IMA structure, the RF converter acts
as a device compatible with ARINC 629.
RF converters are designed to meet existing ARINC specifications. Electromag-
netic compatibility, specific signal processing algorithms and the nature of highly
integrated analog/digital interfaces used in modern RF converter applications require
independent processing capabilities. Consequently, RF converters generally do not
use the core processor module in the cabinet for functional computational processing.
Although the primary standard data bus is an ARINC 629, RF converters can use
analog or other digital interfaces on the aircraft. For example, VHF communication
transceivers can use analog inputs and outputs for voice messages.
To reduce RF cable losses, some RF converters can integrate antenna basic func-
tions or can be placed close to their specialized aircraft antennas. They can be
connected to the corresponding computational LRM with standard data bus.
2.2.12 Speech Functions
Even if the data line will probably be the dominant communication system in the
future, the need for a radio/voice connection will remain, as will the distribution of
voice communications on board the aircraft.
Radiotelephone communication can be performed digitally for airborne distri-
bution and restoration, but digital telephone communication has no direct use in
aircraft systems implemented in the IMA structure, except for possible future use in
recognizing voice commands when it is part of the IMA structure.
The aeronautical telecommunications network (ATN) must have the capability
of moving digitized voice data between standardized vocoders using any approved
physical line. The communication management function (CMF) of the IMA structure
will transmit such data via digital input–output interfaces.
It is assumed that communication with the public and with the cockpit via internal
telephone communication remains outside the IMA structure, regardless of whether
a digital signal is used to transmit the message and control or require specialized
equipment and wiring.
For voice transmission in digital form, the standard ARINC 629 bus must be used.
Commercial telephone systems remain outside the scope of the IMA functions if they
do not use the lines controlled by the CMF. Management of passenger entertainment
and lighting may be in the form of a separate function that is outside the structure of
IMA, but it may use the database and other information available in IMA.
2.2.13 IMA Architecture Examples
The IMA architecture defines the physical and logical relationships between
components and their functional elements, which include sensors, processors,
control/display devices and control/activation devices. Physical relations are deter-
mined by the geographical location of functional elements, while logical relations
are determined by the control hierarchy of signal and data processing in various
elements. Processing in an IMA element includes its own controls and/or being
controlled, regardless of whether they are implemented in software, airborne software
or hardware.
The examples of architectures described in ARINC 651 are optional. It is assumed

that the system requirements may allow changes to these architectures in order to
get the most efficiency for specific applications.
2.2.13.1 Example Architecture “A”
Architecture “A” contains the functional separation of various avionics systems, like
the architecture of the ARINC 700 equipment.
Replaceable LRM modules mounted in a cabinet operate autonomously, in a
manner similar to the ARINC 700 equipment’s LRU replacement units. Since this
architecture is divided into the same way as traditional avionics division, certifi-
cation of an aircraft requires some innovations compared to the established proce-
dures. Connections between interchangeable LRM are made via the ARINC 629
information bus on the backplane.
Architecture “A” uses four cabinets interconnected through four ARINC 629
information buses. Each avionics cabinet has separate data and signal processing
capabilities to support the simultaneous execution of various functions of the system.
The functional interaction between different LRMs that perform different functions
is logically distributed, although each of the LRMs that perform a specific function
provides logically centralized control in a physically distributed architecture. The task
of the developer is to provide a fault-tolerant environment for each cabinet through the
use of similar equipment for the reserve. Avionics functions are distributed among
cabinets based on I/O requirements, data throughput, memory requirements and
interoperability. Each cabinet is powered by fault-tolerant power supply modules.
Data processing in the architecture “A” cabinet is provided by a group of standard
processing modules. Each standard processing module performs a specific function
of avionics. The equipment for the processing module includes:
• power supply module interface;
• backplane bus interface;
• memory management unit and central processing unit (CPU);
• nonvolatile memory for storing programs and data;
• random access memory for executable application programs.
The software is based on a single executive/single application (SESA) structure.
The one-time function is responsible for planning, managing and executing a single
application program. Figure 2.12 illustrates the architecture of the processing module.
External data input–output control in the architecture “A” includes control of
the ARINC 629 bus and special airborne I/O functions. Thus, in order to control
Fig. 2.12 Architecture “A” Hardware Software

processing module PS I/F – power supply module interface Perfomance
ROM
Bus interface ARINC 629 CPU One application
RAM
the input–output of the cabinet, the function of controlling the input–output of the
cabinet includes the following functions:
• the function of receiving and transmitting I/O;
• I/O conversion function;
• input–output formatting function;
• the function of reporting on the status and reliability of data.
The ARINC 629 data transmission control bus is controlled by means of bridge
or gateway modules, where special input–output control is carried out by means of
specialized modules. This includes control of receiving/transmitting data, converting
data, formatting data into a backplane data bus format, checking data reliability and
confirming the status of the input–output data at the receiver. Consequently, the
data and their status are provided by the internal modules of the cabinet, using data
transmitted outside of the cabinet.
Each avionics cabinet is a fault-tolerant environment using similar backup hard-
ware. However, if the use of a heterogeneous reserve is required, this is ensured by
the installation of the application program using heterogeneous equipment in the
cabinets.
The power supply and the backplane bus, as integrated parts of the cabinet, are
necessary to ensure resilient performance. Therefore, the backplane data bus must
be implemented in a triple redundant configuration and provide detection, isolation,
and fault and error correction capabilities to enhance maintenance capabilities. It
is necessary that the failure at one point does not cause data loss in all tires of the
combining panel. Fail safety of the power supply is provided by means of quad power
supplies to ensure continuous supply of power to the cabinet.
Each LRM plug-in module has its own fault propagation area to ensure that faults
can be isolated for maintenance purposes in LRM.
Separate input and output channels may or may not require fault tolerance,
depending on the criticality of the requirements for input–output and the airborne
system.
In architecture “A,” which is based on the logical distribution of avionics functions
in cabinets, software build-up to enhance the functionality of cabinets requires, in
turn, capacity building:
• number of processing modules;
• processing unit performance;
• quantities and interfaces of I/O modules.
In this architecture, each processing module in the cabinet corresponds to a special
function of avionics, which is physically and logically distant from all other functions
in the same cabinet. Therefore, adding an avionics function may require adding a
processing module and/or an I/O module with additional interface capabilities.
The design of the cabinet should create conditions for the future increase in the
number of processing and input–output modules. Building software on a cabinet will
require increasing both at the cabinet level and at the module level.
2.2.13.2 Example Architecture “B”
Architecture “B” is based on the concept of centralized processing, using a powerful

kernel processing module that provides a group processing function. This architecture
supports the concept of remote localized sensors compatible with the ARINC 629
bus and drive and display systems.
Cabinets consist of processing elements, power supply modules and a combination
of standard and special input–output modules, as shown in Fig. 2.13. The specific
implementation is not limited to the architecture and can be expanded to enhance
functionality when using more cabinets. The scales are connected by numerous
ARINC 629 data buses, which are also used as an interface to other resources. In the
event of a computing resource failure or a cabinet failure, other cabinets can receive
information from the remaining resources associated with the data bus. This provides
transparent work at the system level. The cabinet uses the ARINC 659 fault-tolerant
data transfer bus for modules that require a fault-tolerant interface.
The core processor is located next to the I/O electronics for the read and control
functions. The computing device is a logically centralized control element. If the
cabinets are located at a distance from the reading and control/control elements, then
this architecture will require substantial connections to ensure the interconnection
of all components.
The main feature of this architecture is deterministic work with a predefined
control tool. Remotely controlled sensors and actuators are designed with communi-
cation interfaces that are fully testable and analyzable. Such architectures are suitable
for a relatively straightforward validation procedure.
In architecture “B,” data processing in the cabinet is carried out by one fail-
resistant core processing module, capable of performing a number of avionics
functions. The hardware included in the core processing module includes:
Input / output Input / output Input / output Input / output

devices devices devices devices
Fault tolerant I / O Fault tolerant I / O Fault tolerant I / O Fault tolerant I / O
Fault tolerant Fault tolerant Fault tolerant Fault tolerant

processing element processing element processing element processing element
Fault tolerant Fault tolerant Fault tolerant Fault tolerant

interface interface interface interface
Left board system
Right board system
Fig. 2.13 Example architecture “B”

Fig. 2.14 Architecture “B” Hardware Software

core processing module PS I/F – power supply module interface Perfomance
Application (1)
ARINC 629 bus interface ROM
Application (2)
CPU
-----
ARINC 659 bus interface RAM
Application (n)

• ARINC 629 data bus interface;
• ARINC 659 bus interface;
• central processor and memory control unit;
• RAM for executable application programs.
The software is based on a single executive/multiple applications (SEMA) struc-
ture. One-time execution is responsible for planning, managing and executing
programs. Figure 2.14 illustrates the architecture of the core processing module.
To ensure a stable and impermeable separation between the functions that relate
to the processor, the memory management equipment is used. As a result, applica-
tion tasks do not have any effect on the memory management function. Memory
management hardware is built into the base processor. Memory management tables
do not need to be changed in dynamic mode, and therefore they can be implemented
in nonvolatile memory.
Interfaces of external input–output of the architecture “B” cabinet include:
• ARINC 629 data bus;
• ARINC 429 data bus;
• analog data and power interfaces;
• discrete data interface;
• sync data interface.
To control the external I/O of the cabinet, the I/O control functions include the
functions of receiving and transmitting, transforming, formatting, reporting on the
reliability and status of data, and configuration of standard input–output.
The functions of receiving and transmitting data, messages about the accuracy
and status and formatting of data are part of the functions of input–output control
for all cabinet architectures. However, since in architecture “B,” an IMA cabinet
can also be associated with non-digital input–output interfaces, the control function
additionally includes a data conversion function.
In addition, the I/O control function provides the ability to connect a standard I/O
module in accordance with the mating requirements for a specific cabinet.
In architecture “B,” the functional integrity and availability of the system are
ensured by means of the fault-tolerant environment of the cabinet, as well as by
reserving the system at the cabinet level.
Fault tolerance of the cabinet is achieved by implementing fault-tolerant work at
the modular level. Failsafe operation of the processor core module is provided by
redundant processor components inside the module. At a minimum, each failsafe

module uses a pair of dual processors.
Separate I/O channels may or may not be fault-tolerant depending on the criticality
of the requirements for input–output and the airborne system. At a minimum, a single
failure in a standard I/O module should not affect the readiness of more than one
signal.
At the module level, each device contains its own fault limit zone. This is to ensure
that removable LRM can be isolated from failures. Maintainability is provided at the
cabinet level so that all failures that cause loss of function can be automatically
eliminated in the damaged module.
The backplane data bus interface provides the ability to detect and repair bus
failures and multiple fault circumvention paths (i.e., fault-tolerant operation). This
bus is implemented in a configuration with four times redundant. The level and
method of redundancy, methods of detecting a failure, localization of a failure and
recovery after it (by reconfiguring resources) used in each of the common elements
are completely transparent to the application software.
In architecture “B,” monitoring and reporting on the status of common elements
are carried out at the level of tasks performed by the cabinet. The application software
is responsible for monitoring and reporting the performance of the elements of a
particular function regarding the maintenance task at the cabinet level. The message
on the state of the elements is transmitted over the ARINC 629 data transmission
buses to the airborne maintenance system (OMS) or equivalent equipment through the
cabinet maintenance function in accordance with the ideology of the built-in control
and maintenance (BITE) of the aircraft. The level of redundancy and enhancement
of fault tolerance for a specific number of failures that the system can withstand,
restoring its work, depend on the given readiness and integrity of tasks.
In the “B” architecture, based on the logical centralization of the avionics functions
of the cabinet, increasing the software in order to expand the functional capabilities
of the cabinet will require increasing in the following areas:
• core module features;
• the number and types of I/O modules;
• cabinet interfaces.
The requirement to expand the capabilities of the core module is met by increasing
the bandwidth and increasing the memory capacity required for processing and
storing additional application programs. However, due to the modular nature of
the architecture and its flexibility, the extensions of the individual components are
independent of each other.
Additional applications may require additional data and input–output interfaces.
In each case, when building up, a certain number and types of I/O modules should
be provided. The limit of maximum capacity is laid in the system at the stage of the
initial design of the IMA cabinet and modules.
2.2.13.3 Example Architecture “C”
Architecture “C” is made on the basis of logical centralization in the physical distri-
bution of elements. The motivation for choosing this architecture lies in the fact that
the logical definitions of the functional capabilities of avionics are separated from
their physical implementation. Each component of this architecture is a virtual node
capable of providing autonomous work through cooperation with other nodes. Archi-
tecture “C” has a hierarchical nature in order to separate the logical structure, i.e.,
“What” functionality is avionic, from physical implementation, i.e., “How” this func-
tionality is implemented. This architecture uses a scheme for detecting and localizing
failures, managing reserves for actively managing faulty elements and ensuring trans-
parent operation. All communications at the system level between cabinets, sensors,
drives and other devices are carried out via information buses ARINC 629.
The “C” architecture is built on the basis of the physical separation of remote
functions, whereas the logical interaction between different functional elements is
hierarchical in nature, determined by the control of the central processor of the core.
The core processor is an element that controls the operation of all I/O interfaces
(located near the center or remote), determines the appropriate actions and controls
the display or control mechanisms/drives.
In the “C” architecture, the cabinets contain power supply modules, bus
bridges/gateways and core processing elements (Fig. 2.15). I/O signals are processed
in remote data hubs located far from cabinets, thereby providing physically sepa-
rated processing functions from their sources and transferring already processed
data to receivers. This is especially important in order to minimize the complexity
of increasing the computing capacity of the system. When possible, the sensor and
actuator are also placed at a distance. They are “intelligent” devices in the sense that
all functions of the internal control loop are located in the devices themselves.
In the “C” architecture, the data processing of the cabinet is carried out by means
of several core processing modules, each of which is capable of performing the
functions of a number of avionics devices through the execution of common software.
The hardware of the core processing module (Fig. 2.16) includes:
• power supply interface;
• ARINC 659 interface;
• memory control unit and central processor;
• volatile memory for storing applications and data;
• random access memory for application execution.
The main difference between the “B” and “C” architectures is that in the “C”
architecture, processing resources are physically dependent on their I/O data, whereas
in the “B” architecture they are not the result of combining the functions of and their
I/O data in the same cabinet.
The software in the “C” architecture is based on the single executive/multiple
applications (SEMA) structure. Single execution is responsible for managing
application programs in the core processor module.
1) 1) 1)
2) 2) 2)
3) 3) 3)
4) 4) 4)
5) 6) 6) 7) 5) 6) 6) 7) 5) 6) 6) 7)
8) 8) 8)
15)
9) 10) 11)
13) 12) 13) 14)
1) Cabinets 1, 2, ..., n
2) ARINC 659 backplane bus
3) Power
4) Power Module
5) Gateway
6) Core
7) Input / output
8) AC Power
9) ARINC 629 compatible drive
10) Sensor compatible with ARINC 629 bus
11) Remote Data Hub
12) Status Input
13) I / O data
14) Lamp indicator
15) Global data bus ARINC 629
Fig. 2.15 Example architecture “C”
Hardware Software
PS I/F – power supply module interface Perfomance
Application (1)
ROM
Application (2)
ARINC 659 bus interface Central processing unit / memory control unit
-----
RAM
Application (n)
Fig. 2.16 Architecture “C” core processing module

Architecture “C” provides hardware memory management, creating a stable and

impenetrable separation between different applications. As a result of this task, appli-
cations do not affect the memory management function. The memory management
hardware is built into the core processor and supports program execution.
In the “C” architecture, the preferred interface for transferring external data in
the cabinet is the ARINC 629 data bus. However, this does not preclude the use of
other forms of the built-in I/O cabinet, where costs dictate that I/O devices are located
inside the cabinet. However, where I/O devices are placed in cabinets, this placement
must be made independent of the application. In order to control the input–output
of the cabinet, the following functions should be included in the control function for
receiving/transmitting input–output data of the cabinet:
• reception and transmission of data;
• data conversion, where it is required;
• message on the status and validation of data.
The ARINC 629 information bus interface operates on the basis of a gateway
(gateway) model. The gateway function includes control of reading and writing of
data, data conversion and data transfer functions between the ARINC 629 and ARINC
659 data formats. The data management for other uses on certain interfaces is carried
out by the central processor together with a message confirming the correctness and
accuracy of the input–output data states.
In architecture “C,” functional readiness and integrity are considered as high-level
properties of a set of avionics and can be achieved with an appropriate interconnection
of elements that themselves do not need to be fault-tolerant such as a complete system.
In architecture “C,” fault tolerance can be provided by duplication of application
functions with the help of redundant elements at the system level, at the cabinet
level and/or at the level of the plug-in LRM. This structure makes it possible to
achieve the most cost-effective reliability for the operation of individual elements of
avionics. The design of fault tolerance is implemented in such a way as to minimize
the destruction at the system level, to minimize the efforts on respecification by
adding new programs, plug-in LRM modules or cabinets.
Additionally, the “C” architecture supports the concept of a gradual decrease
in system performance in the presence of non-critical failures, which is due to the
separation of applied problems from their sources of raw data.
Fault tolerance of the system level is ensured through the use of backup cabinets,
where applications are duplicated at the expense of these reserve cabinets. These
cabinets can be heterogeneous. The output of duplicate applications is used to detect
failure and isolate it at the system level.
The fault tolerance of the cabinet level is ensured by duplicating application
functions by using redundant plug-in LRM within one cabinet. These plug-ins can
be heterogeneous. In the architecture tour “C,” the LRM may not be fault-tolerant,
since oak is used at the level of the cabinet system.
The fault tolerance level of the LRM plug-in module can be provided by means
of detecting a failure and isolating it at the LRM level. In addition, application-level
fault tolerance can be of a different purpose in one LRM. These applications can be
designed and implemented in different ways, but they are designed for a common
processor.
In the “C” architecture, developed on the basis of the separation of physical
implementations of applications and data of their interface, increasing software in
order to enhance the functional capabilities of avionics allows additional applications
by connecting additional cabinets to the ARINC 629 information bus. Additional
core processing modules can be added to existing cabinets. In addition, existing core
processing modules can be replaced with core modules with additional processing
capability. Thus, in architecture “C” software can be increased by one or all of the
following means:
• additional number and configuration of cabinets;
• an additional number of core processing modules;
• capabilities of core processing modules.
2.2.13.4 Example Architecture “D”
Architecture “D” (Fig. 2.17) provides a flexible, fault-tolerant avionics architecture.

The cabinet consists of computing power in combination with one or more application
programs.
This architecture is based on the separation and transparency of functions. The
separation causes the system to be physically remotely controlled, although trans-
parency indicates that this separation is hidden from users who use the functions of
the system. There is mutual autonomy of the various components of the IMA struc-
ture without any strict hierarchy between the different elements of the system. This
is achieved at the physical level using an autonomous network of data transmission
systems, where the transfer of a message requires the combined actions of sending
and receiving components. The receiving component must be able to decide whether
the required service is provided.
It should be noted that these components are logically separated, so the structure
is capable of independently and dynamically managing its work in the autonomous
mode, instead of being dependent on the centralized control element that controls
their work. This allows dynamic reconfiguration in the architecture. In IMA, this
feature is used to improve the resiliency of architects.
The application in use contains one or more avionics functions (e.g., sensor
control, sensor data processing, autopilot function, etc.) that can be loaded and
executed by the processing module. This processing module executes several appli-
cations at the same time. The number of applications in a single processing module
depends on the performance of that particular module. If the performance of a single
processing module is not sufficient for all applications in the cabinet, additional
processing modules should be installed.
Very critical applications should be separated (placed in separate enclosures) and
separated from less critical functions, provided that all certification problems caused
by the integration of functions with different levels of criticality are solved in the
same cabinet.
Backplane Data Bus
Data bus bridge
Data bus bridge

Power source
Application
Application
Application
Application
Processing
Processing
... ... ... Cabinet
ARINC 629 optical data bus
Data
loader
Duplicated Backplane
Bus
Bus
Bus
Power bus 1
Power bus 2
Power bus
Power bus
Power bus
1/2
1/2
1/2
ARINC 629 data
conversion
Power
Power
Power
Power source 1
Power source 2
input
input
input
Input/Output Input/Output Input/Output
RAM
Bootloader data
CPU RAM Mass

Application
memory
controller
(EEPROM)
Gateway
Input/ Input/
Perfomance Output Output module
Power CPU Application
supply processing module
Bus
№2
Bus
№1
module module
Data
loader
Fig. 2.17 Example architecture “D”
Each cabinet contains elements that provide fault tolerance, thanks to redundancy
at the level of the modules and the backplane in order to postpone the maintenance
activities for the scheduled maintenance time and allow for reconfiguration.
After failure, which affects in some way the application, there must be a way to
reorganize the configuration of applications at the cabinet level so that the application
being implemented can continue to work correctly. This reconfiguration within the
cabinet or between cabinets will increase the life span of the application.
Avionic applications are distributed in cabinets based on the level of criti-
cality, communication with other applications, memory capacity, memory processing
performance, placement of used remote systems, etc.
In the architecture “D,” the cabinet data is processed by at least one data processing
module, where the execution program resides, and a number of other modules,
Hardware Software
PS I/F – power supply module interface
ROM Multiple applications
ARINC 659 bus interface Central processing unit / memory control unit
RAM
Fig. 2.18 Architecture “D” data processing module
Hardware Software
PS I/F power supply module interface
ROM Multiple applications
ARINC 659 bus interface Application controller
RAM
Fig. 2.19 Architecture “D” application module
called application modules, where the application software resides. Each application
module contains software for one or more specific avionics functions.
The equipment of the data processing module (Fig. 2.18) may include:
• power supply interface;
• bus interface of the ARINC 659 backplane;
• central processor and memory control unit;
• a small nonvolatile memory for storing the execution program;
• large random access memory for application programs.
The equipment of the application module (Fig. 2.19) may include:

• bus interface of the ARINC 659 backplane;
• application controller;
• large nonvolatile memory for storing application programs and data;
• low RAM for processing application status information and ARINC 659 I/O
buffer.
The software structure is based on the single executive/multiple applications
(SEMA) structure, in which case one execution program, placed in a processing
module, is responsible for processing (scheduling, controlling, executing, etc.) many
applications, placed in one or more application modules.
The memory management function provides a stable separation between the appli-
cation programs that are executed in the processing module. It also manages the
reconfiguration of the application software during normal operation and in the event
of a failure.
Separation is a hardware function that allows you to execute application programs
of various severity levels using the same processing resource in such a way as not to
create harmful interaction between application programs.
The reconfiguration feature allows you to delay maintenance activities without
jeopardizing safety aspects. This function is part of the operating system of the
processing module. It uses configuration information from the reconfiguration
strategy table, which provides multiple reconfiguration paths for executing a given
program.
In the event of a failure of a processing module or an application module, the
reconfiguration function attempts to change the course of execution of an application
program through other processing modules in the same cabinet or in other cabinets,
so that there is no decrease in the efficiency of the system.
In addition, this method can be used to reduce the load on the processing
module. The reconfiguration function can determine through a special table which
applications are needed to perform specific functions at each moment of flight.
In the architecture “D,” external I/O data transfer is provided only via ARINC 629
buses. Thus, to process the I/O data of the cabinet, the cabinet I/O control function
includes the following functions:
• reception and transmission;
• formatting I/O data;
• data validation and I/O status reporting.
All cabinet I/O control functions control the fault-tolerant modules of the bridge
and bus gateway. These include the management of reading and writing, format-
ting data in the ARINC 629 and ARINC 659 formats, evaluating the accuracy and
reporting the accuracy and status of the I/O data to the data recipient.
In the architecture “D,” the redundancy level of the cabinet or the redundancy
level of the module is determined by the severity level of the application function.
Some level of data bus redundancy is also required to ensure the integrity of the
transferred data.
In the architecture “D,” the avionics functions of the same cabinet are logically
centralized; that is, they are operated in the same environment controlled by a
single execution program (the operating system), and at the time they are phys-
ically distributed among the various application program modules inside the same
wardrobe environment. In this environment, the development of application software
for functional expansion of the cabinet requires an increase of:
• computing power and memory capacity of processing and application modules;
• the number of application modules inside the cabinet.
2.2.13.5 Example Architecture “E”
Architecture “E” is a combination of physically centralized and distributed architec-

ture. Most of the equipment is grouped in cabinets that adhere to the ARINC 650
specification. These cabinets are placed on the board based on analysis and trade-
offs between reduced installation, limited reachability for airborne maintenance,
environmental conditions and accessible seats on the aircraft.
Cabinets consist of processing modules, power modules and a combination of
standard and special I/O modules, as shown in Fig. 2.20. The cabinets are connected
by ARINC 629 data buses, which are also used as an interface with other resources.
Cabinets use the ARINC 659 bus for high real-time data requirements.
ARINC 629 network
Power Core Core Bus Bus Input / Input / Power

source module module bridge bridge output output source
1 1 2 module module module module 2
ARINC 659 network
Fig. 2.20 Configuration of the cabinet architecture “E”
The integration principle assumes the presence of a core module that is shared
between several applications. Executive software supports multiple application
programs and strict separation of application software. Standard hardware is inde-
pendent of application software specializing in avionics functions. The distribution
of these applications is carried out in determining the architecture of the system.
There is no means for dynamically redistributing processor, or I/O resources other
than those installed for applications.
This architecture ensures better test coverage in the validation process and simpli-
fies certification due to the lower number of operational configurations that the system
performs.
The cabinet can accommodate one or more core modules to meet the requirements
of avionics functions such as increased computational power or multiple implemen-
tations. The processing module performs digital processing of avionic functions. It
can be divided between several applications. The hardware of the processing module
includes:
• power module interface;
• central processor and memory management module;
• RAM for the execution of application programs.
The executable software of this processing module includes a set of general
maintenance programs such as application planning, monitoring current health and
managing communication between applications (Fig. 2.21).
The isolation between application programs is achieved by a stable partition
between applications located in memory space. The links between applications
directly and between applications and the function of monitoring current health
are made through executive software services. Each application software has its own
Hardware Software
PS I/F – power supply module interface Perfomance
Application (1)
ARINC 629 bus interface ROM
Central processing unit / memory control Application (2)
unit -----
ARINC 659 bus interface RAM
Application (n)
Fig. 2.21 Architecture “E” core processing module
memory space, which is accessible only to the application program and operating
system through specific services.
Reserving applications in different cabinets depends on their criticality. Possible
redundancy reconfigurations are approved in the process of defining the system archi-
tecture. In addition, the “switching” logic will differ from one system to another, as
they adapt to the function performed and to specific indicators of readiness and
security. Thus, this logic is highlighted as part of the application function.
Fault tolerance can also be provided by the physical resources of the cabinet.
The safety benefits of cabinets should be analyzed to ensure aircraft safety. Failsafe
cabinets may allow a decrease in the degree of functional redundancy with high
reliability of low-level resources.
In the case of fault-tolerant cabinets, fault-tolerant hardware modules should
be defined. These modules manage their own redundant resources (detecting and
isolating a defective item) to limit errors and maintain readiness using reconfig-
uration mechanisms. Such mechanisms could be part of a module or common to
redundant modules inside a cabinet.
The examples of IMA architectures can be qualified as combinations of centralized
and distributed structures. The main advantage of the centralized structure is its
relative simplicity, controllability and analyzability, which facilitate the process of
performance monitoring of airborne avionics. A distributed structure using a set of
control channels provides smoother degradation of characteristics with an increase in
the number of failures. The distributed structure is more difficult to control, analyze
and confirm operability.
2.2.14 Summary
The main idea of the IMA concept is to standardize hardware modules that perform
specific functions that are not functions of specific aircraft systems, but universal
functions of avionics. Standardized digital data processors, input–output modules,
data bus interfaces and power supplies are provided for solving various avionics
applications. Each application program or software module is separated from other
application programs, thus performing a separation of the functions of the aircraft
systems. The software modules are separated, but they use the hardware modules of
the cabinet as public resources.
This approach can be extended to all avionics functions performed only by

computational means. It is not without reason that the architecture of airborne radio-
electronic equipment in ARINC 651 is not considered, it is not included in the cabi-
nets, and a remark has been made regarding the design of avionics that it must comply
with ARINC standards. Thus, the integration of airborne radio-electronic equipment
requires special consideration, which is the subject of Chapter 4 of this book. At the
same time, many ideas of the IMA concept can also be used in the development of
principles for the construction of integrated airborne radio-electronic equipment.
The ARINC 651 document rightly states that the implementation of IMA will
proceed gradually, through transitional stages, in order to reduce technical and
economic risk for each subproject. This began with the partial implementation of
IMA ideas on a Boeing 777 aircraft. It is expected that IMA can be applied as new
aircraft become operational and as confidence in IMA grows. At the same time, if you
avoid a systematic transition to integrated modular avionics, in particular, due to the
high initial costs, the unorganized, de facto integration of equipment will continue,
which will result in an increase in the cost of equipment and certification complexity
[20].
2.3 IMA RTCA Concept
IMA ideas were developed in RTCA documents. Recognizing the rapid growth in the
use of integrated modular avionic equipment that has been used in various classes of
aircraft, RTCA has created a Special Committee 200 (SC-200), and EUROCAE has
established Working Group 60 (WG-60) to jointly develop a document that could be
used as a guide in the design, development and application of IMA. The participants in
the development of this document included representatives of government, industry
and academia.
The RTCA/DO-297 “Guidelines for the Development and Certification of Inte-
grated Modular Aviation Electronic Equipment (IMA)” [45] was released in
November 2005. It contains a guide for IMA developers, application developers,
integrators, write—applications for certification and for those who participate in the
certification and maintenance of constant flight readiness of IMA systems. The docu-
ment contains specific instructions for ensuring the technical characteristics of IMA
systems, in contrast to traditional integrated systems.
The development of RTCA/DO-297 is based on previous RTCA/EUROCAE
documents, for example, RTCA/DO-178/EUROCAE ED-12 [46] and RTCA/DO-
254/EUROCAE ED-80 [47]. The drafting of the document also reflected the concep-
tual provisions of other RTCA and EUROCAE documents, as well as SAE and
ARINC documents.
According to RTCA/DO-297, IMA is a shared set of flexible reusable and inter-
operable hardware and software resources that, when integrated, form a platform that
provides performance, tested and designed for a specific set of security requirements
2.3 IMA RTCA Concept 81
and technical characteristics, in order to support applications that perform the func-
tions of the aircraft. The manual presents the concepts of IMA systems, including
platforms and modules, their interrelations with supported application programs and
avionics functions used in aircraft equipment, and describes how developers and
integrators can collect step-by-step certifications for modules, platform and appli-
cation integration, which will enable applicants to provide technical specifications
for an IMA system on an aviation-certified product. The characteristics of the equip-
ment are described in the part concerning its integration into the platform, but do
not concern either the specific equipment functions or the specific requirements
of the “Technical Standard Orders” (TSO)/ “European Technical Standard Orders
(ETSO),” “Minimum Operational Performance Standards” (MOPS) or “Minimum
Aviation System Performance Standards” (MASPS).
It is noted that the IMA platform must provide tight segmentation and other
protective measures that allow several applications to share the platform and its
resources, or to maintain operation using a fail-resistant network. The IMA platform
can be supplied by a system integrator or a third-party vendor. In the same way, IMA
software applications can be supplied by a platform provider or a third-party vendor.
The main driving forces behind the IMA concept are economic factors, including
the need to provide cost-effective upgrades and determine operational capabilities
(e.g., CNS/ATM functions), requirements for quick and efficient maintenance, and
prevention of premature obsolescence. In light of these prerequisites, the docu-
ment describes a group of processes and makes recommendations necessary for
the development and certification of IMA systems.
The following terms are used to describe IMA systems.
Aircraft function—aircraft capability, which can be provided by hardware and soft-
ware of systems installed on an aircraft. Functions include flight control, autopilot,
braking, fuel consumption monitoring, flight instruments, etc. Potentially, the IMA
can expand the definition of aviation radio electronic equipment to enable any
airborne function.
Application is a software or hardware tool designed specifically for an application,
with a specific set of interfaces that, when integrated into a platform, performs a
specific function.
Component is an autonomous part of hardware, a part of software and a database
controlled by configuration. The component itself does not function as an aircraft.
Basic software is an operating system and supporting software that manages
resources to create an environment in which applications can run. Basic software is
a necessary component of the platform and usually consists of one or more modules.
IMA—system consists of an IMA platform(s) and a specific set of supported
applications.
Interoperability—the ability of several integrated modules to work together to
accomplish a specific task. This requires the establishment of certain interfaces
between the modules and allows the use of other functionally compatible compo-
nents. To describe this concept in physical terms, it should be said that the plat-
form form can include functionally compatible modules and components, as well as
physical devices (processor, memory, electricity, water/output devices) and logical
elements, for example, the operating system and communication software.
Module—a component or set of components that can be perceived on its own or
in context with IMA. A module may also include other modules. A module can
be software, hardware or a combination of software and hardware that provides
resources to applications supported by IMA. Modules can be distributed across the
aircraft or installed in one place.
Segmentation—acceptance of building architecture in order to create the necessary
separation and independence of functions or spheres of application to obtain only the
necessary connections. The security mechanisms in the IMA platform are determined
by the required level of integration.
Platform—a module or group of modules, including basic software, that manages
resources in such a way as to ensure the operation of at least one application. The
resources of the IMA hardware and software are designed and organized in such a
way as to ensure the computing process, the connectivity and the interoperability of
the interfaces to support at least one application. The platforms themselves do not
perform any functions of an aircraft. The platform creates a computing environment,
performs support functions and provides capabilities relating to the platform, such
as monitoring operational status and troubleshooting. The platform can be certified
separately from supported applications.
Resource—any object (processor, memory, software, data, etc.) or component used
in the IMA platform or application. A resource can be used jointly by several appli-
cations, or it can be dedicated to a specific application. The resource can be physical
(hardware) or logical (some amount of information).
Reuse—data confirming the technical characteristics of previously certified modules,
and applications can be used for the subsequent design of the aircraft system with a
reduced need for reworking the design or additional certification.
The IMA system architecture consists of one or more platforms and includes inter-
faces with other aircraft systems and users (e.g., flight crew, maintenance personnel,
etc.). The purpose of the aircraft’s functions is addressed to the IMA system archi-
tecture to ensure compliance with the requirements for operational performance,
operability and safety.
The IMA platform has extensibility capabilities if the introduction of a new appli-
cation into its configuration does not violate any proven requirements of already inte-
grated applications. In the extensible architecture, the system requirements derive
from the requirements defined by the IMA applications. An IMA platform with well-
defined interface boundaries may be extensible with respect to partial adoption of
integrated applications.
2.3 IMA RTCA Concept 83
The main elements of building an IMA system are the platform and supported
applications. The IMA platform can be characterized as follows.
(1) Platform resources are shared by several applications.
Integration involves the sharing of resources. The IMA platform has the
ability to support several applications using segmentation and other means
of protection provided by it (e.g., power supply, built-in diagnostics).
(2) The IMA platform provides tight segmentation of shared resources. This
feature ensures that the shared resources of the platform are protected from
abnormal operation of applications using these resources.
(3) The IMA platform allows interaction of supported applications with other
supported applications through well-defined interfaces. The IMA platform is a
general-purpose computing platform capable of supporting one or more aircraft
functions or one or more applications. Therefore, the operation of the platform
can be verified independently of the applications. This feature is necessary to
separate changes between the platform and supported applications. The goal
is to enable the platform to be modified with the least impact on the supported
applications and to make changes to the applications with the least impact on
the platform.
The platform provides documented (and verified) application programming
interfaces (APIs) for accessing applications to platform services and resources.
(4) The sharing resources of the IMA platform are configurable, which provides
the requirements of supported applications to resources.
Applications supported by IMA can be characterized as follows.
(1) The application can be developed independent of other applications and receive
a phased certification on the IMA platform form independently of other
applications.
(2) Applications can be integrated into the platform without unintended interaction
with other supported applications.
(3) Applications can be reused.
(4) Applications can be modified separately from each other.
Examples of IMA systems are provided in Appendix D of RTCA/DO-297. Most of
the examples contain resources related to computing tools (central processor, memory
management device, floating point processor, coprocessors, a special mechanism
for organizing hardware tools that provide hard segmentation, physical memory,
access to the aircraft network and input channels/output). Only one example illus-
trates the software-defined radio (SDR) platform architecture, which includes the
8.33 kHz transponder and the S mode transponder. It is assumed that the SDR plat-
form can simultaneously support a large number of different radio equipments in a
wide frequency range from the existing large group of radio communications.
It seems that the concept of IMA, as outlined in RTCA/DO-297 and further docu-
ments based on this manual, relates mainly to airborne computing media, which is
confirmed by the wide practice of its application in aviation.
2.4 Concepts of Integrated Aviation Equipment

in the USSR and the Russian Federation
In a series dedicated to the principles of organizing avionics complexes, one of the

first is the work of G.N. Gromov with co-authors. The first of them was published in
1970 in the production edition and is devoted to the use of the principle of hierarchical
autonomy in the construction of a complex of systems of modern aircraft. A revised
version of this work appeared in the open press only after 10 years [21]. Note that the
1970s were a time of intensive theoretical studies of hierarchical multi-level systems,
and it was during these years that the first works of M. Mesarovic and his colleagues
appeared [22–24], as well as other works on hierarchical systems [25, 26]. Therefore,
G.N. Gromov was to a certain extent a pioneer in the application of the principles of
hierarchical control in avionics.
In the works of G.N. Gromov, it was noted that modern aircraft, especially military
aircraft, which are distinguished by high speeds, a wide range of flight altitudes and
multifunctional use, put a number of new and difficult tasks before the developers of
aircraft systems, the solution of which is not always possible only in the framework
of creating one particular system. Such tasks include: improving the accuracy of
flight along a given trajectory or reaching a given point, increasing noise immunity
and secrecy, increasing reliability and survivability, ensuring the performance of an
aircraft equipped with a set of systems, the widest possible number of tasks and
creating of addition possibility or, on the contrary, reduction of the complex of
systems without significant alterations and, in a short time, obtaining the possibility
of quickly replacing old equipment with new, finally, increasing the “consistency”
of installed systems with pilot possibility.
In addition, the development of aviation airborne equipment puts traditional
requirements: weight, size, power consumption while maintaining and in some cases
increasing functions.
These requirements show the complexity of equipment developing for each of the
aviation systems. Even more complicated is the creation of equipment taking into
account the requirements for the complex as a whole for this particular aircraft, with
its individual features, and even more so for a typical aviation REC for a certain class
of aircraft.
A number of research institutes, experimental design bureaus and enterprises
belonging to the most diverse branches of science and technology take part in the
development of aviation REC, which further complicates the development of aviation
REC.
When creating an aviation REC, it is necessary to solve a number of complex
tasks, including the task of distributing functions between systems and groups of
systems, and the task of coordinating their work. However, there was no theory of
creating such complex systems as the aviation REC in the 1970s; in fact, there is still
no present. As a result, such complex systems are organized and improved on the
basis of intuition and the experience of developers and on the basis of an analysis of
the deficiencies that have occurred in previous designs. In addition, until recently, the
2.4 Concepts of Integrated Aviation Equipment in the USSR … 85
issues of mass, size, power consumption and cost of individual elements and systems
played a crucial role in the organization of airborne equipment. These factors still
have not lost their significance, but the situation has changed radically and continues
to change every year.
The change in position, when the listed factors were decisive, is the result of a
scientific and technological revolution in the field of electronic technology. Naturally,
the point of view of developers on the principles of organization of aviation RECs
and individual systems must also change.
The absence of a theory of organization of large systems led to the fact that in
the 1970–1980-ies different points of view were expressed. They can be divided into
three groups:
(1) Complete centralization and integration of the entire airborne electronic equip-
ment of the aircraft. At the same time, certain types of equipment perform the
functions of information sensors, and all of its processing is concentrated in
one computing core—the airborne digital computer or system.
(2) Decentralized (otherwise federated) organization, in which unattended single-
function equipment is installed on the aircraft.
(3) The organization of the complex with varying degrees of centralization and
decentralization.
The arguments presented in defense of each of the points of view were largely
fair, but since there was no theory of organizing such complexes, and therefore no
means of comparing complexes according to one or another principle, there was no
unambiguous solution.
Further, in the works of G.N. Gromov, a new approach to the organization of
aviation RECs was proposed, based on the use of the principles of the organization
of living systems.
It is known that biological systems, along with the enormous complexity of the
internal structure, are distinguished by a very perfect organization and possess high
functional reliability and adaptive qualities that enable them to perform the objective
function in a fairly wide class of environments. Therefore, the use of a number of
principles of the organization of biological systems can be very useful in the design
of technical systems and, in particular, aviation systems.
To solve the problem of determining the principle of organization of aviation REK,
you can use the principle of analogy, comparing structural organization, hierarchy
levels and basic principles of interaction between subsystems of a living organism,
from the point of view of its functioning as a whole, with the organization of similar
hierarchy levels and individual subsystems of the airborne complex.
In physiology, it has been experimentally established that, in the presence of a
nutrient medium, cells of tissues, individual organs and organ systems can function
outside the continuous regulating effects of the cerebral cortex; that is, organs and
organ systems provide autonomous work on their specific functions. By internal
autoregulation, cutting the transmission channels of control actions does not lead to
disruption of their operability.
The controlling influences of the cerebral cortex have an adaptive effect, “tuning”
the systems or organs for the level of work that meets the demands of the organism
at the current moment (to ensure the objective function of the moment).
The idea of autonomous control at various levels of the hierarchy was put forward
in the works of I.M. Gelfand and M. Tzetlin, regarding the organism as a complex
multi-level system. Solving the question of the relationship of systems at different
levels, they argue that “a complex multi-level system is considered as a complex
of subsystems that have relative autonomy. Each of these subsystems has its own
‘personal’ problem, which consists in reducing the interaction with the ‘external
environment’; the latter for this subsystem consists of the environment, externally
with respect to the whole system, and of the other subsystems” [27].
From the point of view of physiological data, this question was considered more
fundamentally by Academician Chernigovsky [28]. They put forward a position that
essentially boils down to the following: “The body subsystems work autonomously
and are organized into a multi-level hierarchical structure, functioning in such a
way that the highest level system does not interfere with the lower one until the
lower subsystem ensures the necessary functions in the overall complex of the vital
activity of the organism.” In the works of G.N. Gromov, this provision was called the
“principle of hierarchical autonomy” of the organization of complex systems [21].
Based on the principle of hierarchical autonomy in the works of G.N. Gromov,
a scheme of organization of the airborne equipment complex (Fig. 2.22) with the
following levels of hierarchy is proposed:
• level of sensors and actuators;
Central authority for

coordination and control Level of central authority for
coordination and control
(Flight crew+ onboard digital
electronic computers)
Complex
level
System
level
Sensors and
actuators level
Fig. 2.22 Airborne equipment complex based on the principle of hierarchical autonomy
• system level;
• level of complexes;
• level of central coordinating and monitoring body.
The main architectural properties of the proposed scheme are:

• The complex has a hierarchical architecture and is a collection of systems at
various levels, with the top-level system including the corresponding lower-level
systems in its structure.
• At each level of the hierarchy, the systems work autonomously and provide for the
performance of the objective function prescribed for this level in the optimal or
close to optimal way, which predetermines the presence of adaptation properties
in systems of any level.
• Systems of the upper level of the hierarchy organize the work of the lower levels
only if their indicators go beyond the established boundary conditions to ensure
the objective function of the upper level or when there is a need to restructure the
program of the underlying system or its boundary conditions in accordance with
the change in target—your system functions of the upper level.
• Interconnection between systems and complexes of aviation REC is carried out
at all levels and not only through the highest level.
• Each level contains a computing device that is used to transform, process and
control the correctness of information received from lower-level systems or other
systems, to issue information about control parameters characterizing the correct
operation of this system to the upper-level system and others systems as necessary,
as well as to ensure the optimal performance of a particular objective function in
accordance with the program and the restrictions prescribed by the system at the
upper level.
• Failure of any of the systems of any level or even part of the systems does not
always lead to failure or disintegration of the whole complex and sometimes only
to a decrease in the efficiency of the functioning of the complex (a property later
called gradual degradation).
In this architecture, it should be noted the presence of computing devices at
the levels of complexes, systems, sensors and executive bodies. It is this property
that predetermines the presence of a number of qualities in the proposed structure:
autonomy, adaptability, independence from other systems of the same level, which
allows, if necessary, expanding the capabilities of each level in relation to the tasks
to be solved. This property, in combination with the others listed, should provide the
airborne complex as a whole and its individual levels with a very high life expectancy.
The functions of the central coordination body include:
• development of a program to ensure the implementation of the main objective
function;
• coordination of the operation of the complexes in order to ensure the objective
function assigned to the aviation REC;
• collection and analysis of current data from lower-level systems;
• monitoring systems of underlying hierarchy levels;

• fault detection and shutdown or transfer of systems to another mode of operation;
• deciding on the possibility of performing the main objective function and the
appointment of a new objective function.
The stated principle of building an aviation REK is close to the federal–centralized
one and combines the advantages of both centralized and federal (decentralized)
approaches. Further development of avionics showed a wide use of the principle of
hierarchical autonomy in aviation REK (see Chapter 1).
Another fruitful idea, expressed and substantiated in [21], is the concept of “small
complex navigation system” (SCNS), which allows for functional integration in the
aviation REC. The main purpose of SCNS is to fulfill its private objective function:
to output of information about navigation parameters determined by the primary
sensors to the complex computer and to other systems after optimal processing of
this information. The presence of a computational device in SCNS makes it possible
to solve the problem of determining the coordinates and trajectory control on the
basis of information from the sensors.
Currently, as part of the FNC, many lower-level systems are actually small
complex navigation systems: Integrated equipment based on the INS and GNSS
receivers, SHORAN equipment, air data system equipment, combining information
from a number of primary sensors, etc., means on board the aircraft. As an example
of implementation, in [21] a block diagram of SCNS on the basis of RSBN avionics
(Fig. 2.23) is presented. Such a system is implemented in the airborne equipment
RSBN-6S, A-317, A-331, operated on a number of Russian airplanes.
Features of integrated information processing in integrated avionics, including in
the SCNS, are discussed in Chap. 6.
More recent work until 1996 contains reviews of foreign program airborne
avionics integration [4, 16] or is devoted to the formation of a functional structure of
integrated avionics [29, 30]. Theoretical issues of the organization of the technical
structure of integrated avionics after 1996 first considered in [31, 32]. A comparison
of federated, hierarchical architectures and “hardware-integrated REC (HIREC)”
studied in NAECON publications [31] was carried out, and the HIREC hierarchical
model was formalized based on the description of the coordination process of levels
of the hierarchical system [32]. The authors of these works can be attributed to the
proponents of the extreme point of view that the entire aircraft avionics should be
fully integrated, and the processing of all information of the aviation complex should
be carried out by a centralized computing core.
In [33], the concept of creating a basic ergatic integrated airborne aircraft complex
based on the ideas of [22] was developed. The entire aviation complex of equipment
is considered as a large system based on the HIREC model, within which, however,
depending on the purpose of the functioning, functional-oriented architectures are
distinguished. It is indicated that the current stage of development of the RECs is
characterized by the fact that the developer of a complex, when synthesizing its
structure, can already proceed not from the limited resources available, but from the
multitude of tasks, goals and functions prescribed to the complex. This supported
Fig. 2.23 Structure of a small complex navigation system based on avionics RSBN
the view of the authors of work [29] on the possibility of separate synthesis of the
functional and technical structures of the complex. At the same time, the variants of
the specific structure of the entire aviation complex proposed in [33] reflect the hier-
archical functional and instrumental separation actually existing in modern aviation
complexes into basic systems and subsystems.
In [34], scientific problems in the field of creating an ergatic airborne complex of
promising aircraft were considered. The following methods of system integration are
outlined on the basis of various relationships between the functions and resources of
the system:
(1) creation of complex, which is characterized by the fact that the system functions
and system resources are independent;
(2) functional integration: functions are combined, and resources are independent;
(3) hardware integration: functions are independent, and resources are combined;
(4) technological integration: functions are combined, and resources are combined
(A. A. Krasovsky’s concept [35]);
(5) strongly connected (symbiotic) systems: this method absorbs the previous
methods; at the same time, the resources of the machine and man are still
combined.
Each of the methods of integration uses different approaches (technologies) to

integration: system-analytical, optimization, combinatorial, expert and formal math-
ematical. The system-analytical approach is used in [34] to develop a system design
methodology for ergatic integrated basic complex (IBC).
The initial stage of the development of IBC is the stage of functional and structural
optimization. Its goal is to build the architecture of the complex in the form of an
airborne integrated computing environment (ICE). The hierarchy of objectives (ICE
functions) is analyzed, which is then mapped onto the structure of the complex,
dividing it into many architectures, models and algorithms. For military aviation, the
following ICE functions are highlighted:
• automated flight task planning;
• takeoff and landing functions;
• routing flight functions;
• group flight functions to the target;
• ensuring combat maneuvering.
The presence of certain functions in airplanes of various aircraft genes gives a list
of functions of an ICE for these airplanes.
Next, a multilayered model of algorithms is built, containing layers:
• mode control;
• algorithms for flight stages, divided into the level of artificial intelligence,
trajectory level, flight level, the level of security systems;
• control, adaptation and reconfiguration;
• intersystem interaction.
Constructed as a result of functional and structural optimization, the “functional
architecture of the ICE” and “topology of information exchange” i.e. onboard local
area network, are presented in Fig. 2.24 [34].
A characteristic feature of the resulting functional architecture is its division into
five multi-level systems:
• information system (MIS);
• adaptive management system (MAMS);
• weapon control system (MWCS);
• defense system (MDS);
• communication system (MCS).
In the selected functional systems, functions at various levels are performed that
are characteristic only of the given system. For example, in the MIS at the trajectory
level are the calculation and correction of coordinates.
The developed ICE should interact with integrated distributed sensor systems and
common-pillar equipment, which, thus, are taken out of the limits of ICE.
In the topological structure of the IBC information exchange, the system rings of
each of the five multi-level systems and the system indication ring are highlighted. It
is characteristic that the MIS system ring, unlike the others, includes exchanges with
separate equipment (SRNS receiver, flight information and navigation information
CREW
INTEGRATED INTERACTION
DISTRIBUTED SENSOR CABIN INFORMATION CABIN CONTROL SYSTEMS
PILOT HELMET
SYSTEMS FIELD FIELD OCS
CREW INTELLIGENT INTERFACE
МIS МАMS МWСS МDS МСS Aircraft group

Antenna
commander
system
Assessment of CREW INTELLIGENT SUPPORT SYSTEMS
the navigational Ongoing path The choice of Interaction with Ground-based systems
combat maneuvers The choice of defensive
and tactical optimization means and maneuvers external systems for automated control
and weapons
situation and preparation for
Optoelectronic
flights
sensor system PATH LEVEL
Calculation Development Testing combat Defense training Communication
and correction of a given maneuvers, choosing between crew
of coordinates trajectory weapons members
Automatic mission
Aerometric sensor planning systems
FLIGHT LEVEL
system Angular motion Angle motion Use of defensive
estimation Use of weapons
management agents
Identification Sustainability and

Inertial sensor Airborne and
of sustainability and manageability
system manageability ground trackers
models
GENERAL AIRCRAFT EQUIPMENT

Status sensor Means of
Life support systems Энергосистемы metrological support
system Power plants and Chassis, cargo com-
their automation Hydraulic Pneumatic partments, suspen-
Electrical
system system sions, steering ele-
system ments
Fig. 2.24 Functional structure of the ICE
sensors, INS, CENS, etc.). The exchange in the general aircraft equipment is carried
out separately.
Thus, in [34], the appearance of an IBC was proposed, in which the hardware
integration of computational tools is performed, ensuring the performance of various
tasks of several aircraft functional systems.
In [35], the functional structure and principles of building a multi-level informa-
tion system, included in the IBC, are analyzed. Here, just as in previous works [33,
34], the view is expressed that “the main tasks of an aircraft allow to distinguish
basic functional systems in its airborne complex, by analogy with the basic systems
of an organism,” which resembles the principle of hierarchical autonomy [21].
The task of the MIS in its basic mode of operation is the continuous, stable and
reliable provision of an ergatic IBC and pilot with navigation and flight informa-
tion about the angular position of the aircraft in space and its location in the basic
navigation system of coordinates.
According to the authors, the most preferable is autonomous inertial navigation
mode and determination of the angular position of the aircraft according to the
information of gyroscopic sensors. On the basis of the basic mode, other navigation
modes can be implemented, for example, inertial–Doppler, astro-inertial, inertial–
satellite, correlation-extremal, etc.
It is assumed that the integration of hardware resources in an IIA will be carried out
“at the level of primary measuring transducers, sensors and other ‘indivisible’ basic
elements” [35]. The sensors at the lower level of the MIS functional structure mean
“not only physically implemented primary meters (accelerometers, angular velocity
and acceleration meters, pressures, ambient temperature, etc.), but also functional
software modules for estimating flight parameters,” including algorithms for complex
information processing (CIP).
A number of subsequent works expound the concept of integration of airborne
computing systems. In [5], the structure and possibilities of implementing the Pave
Pace OCS in the form of an integrated computing environment (ICE) are considered.
The structure of the ICE should form four computing systems:
• complex processing, ensuring the solution of the main tasks of the complex on
the basis of a general-purpose airborne computer;
• signal processing based on the airborne digital signal processing;
• intellectual processing, knowledge accumulation and decision-making;
• problem-solving airborne systems.
The first three OCSs have a network organization. The OCS of intellectual
processing combines the resources of all OCS into a single resource and forms
the overall strategy for the functioning of the environment.
The proposed structure differs from both the Pave Pace OCS structure and the
one proposed in [34], since it divides resources according to task classes (“basic,”
signal processing, etc.), rather than functional groups of tasks (control armament,
communications, navigation, surveillance, etc.).
In [5], it is noted that “the creation of a OCS based on an open, scalable ICE with a
continuously rebuilt structure, the resources of which can be redistributed arbitrarily,
is a rather complex scientific and technical problem.
To build such a OCS, it is necessary to solve a number of serious problems
in analyzing and aggregating the REC tasks, building switching networks that
provide signal transmissions and building the necessary structures, developing high-
performance new-generation airborne computers and creating operational systems,
computing systems and the operation of the computing environment. Most of these
problems are currently far from being resolved, as research on them only begins.
In psychological terms, first of all, it is necessary to overcome the barrier of non-
perception of the ideas of the functional orientation of the architecture, which rejects
the presence of hardware-implemented subsystems in the structure of OCS from the
developers of the main designers of the REC subsystems. Due to these factors, a
direct transition from a federally centralized OCS with a deterministic structure to a
computing environment that arbitrarily restructures its structure is associated with a
high technical risk.
In order to reduce the degree of technical risk and ensure the continuity of devel-
opment, it seems to be a purposeful step-by-step transition to the OCS based on the
integrated computing environment. It is advisable to construct the ICE on the basis of
various multiprocessor means, which in the future may represent a single structure.
At the first stage, the ICE is formed only for solving problems of the upper level.
Subsystems of the lower level in the information channels of the REC, including the
airborne computer for signal processing and general-purpose airborne computer, are
preserved.
At the next stage, the computational tools of the information channels are trans-
mitted to the ICE. The structure of the OCS includes a switching network that
provides the connection of the sensors with the means of signal processing. For
control of sensors and for communication with general aircraft systems, it is recom-
mended, as in the first stage, a multiplex information exchange channel. And only
after that, it will be possible with the minimum risk to construct ICE in full on the
basis of a single high-speed interface.”
To create the proposed ICE, it will be necessary to develop highly integrated
modular airborne information processing tools based on high-speed network inter-
faces that provide scalability, reconfigurability, enhanced throughput and perfor-
mance. The structure of the ICE should be formed using unified modules of various
functional purposes, and their type and number, being variables, should not affect
the principles of its organization and functioning.
In our opinion, the tendency to create an integrated computing environment in the
composition of REC can also be supported by the integration of avionics at the lower
level of the hierarchy of aviation REC. This should take into account the peculiarities
of the operation of the airborne electronic equipment, noted in Chap. 1, and ensure
the standardization of interfaces between the levels of REC. At the same time, the
hardware integration of the computational tools for signal processing of radio systems
related to various types of information interaction seems inappropriate.
In [36], set out the general requirements for the integration of airborne avionics
of military aircraft:
“The composition of the modules of the instrumented integrated avionics, its
structure and the possibilities of reconfiguration must ensure the fulfillment of all
the functional tasks at each stage of the combat mission with a given efficiency.
The level of resiliency due to duplication of modules and the reconfiguration of
the structure must correspond to the cost of failure or combat damage (reduction in
combat effectiveness).
The avionics structure should be an open system that allows you to increase the
capabilities of the functions, performance and reliability.
Modular design should provide functional and instrumental integration.
The uniqueness of the integrated avionics for a particular aircraft is achieved
through the inclusion of individual highly specialized modules.”
In general, the requirements stated are similar to the requirements of the IMA
concept in ARINC 651.
The author develops the idea outlined in previous works [31, 32] of creating an
hardware-integrated avionics system that realizes all radiotechnical tasks on board
the aircraft. The main areas of hardware integration are:
• creation of an integrated transceiver system in the entire radio frequency range
and in the optical range of airborne equipment;
• creation of an integrated signal and information processing system based on the
use of a single high-performance information and computing system;
• creation of integrated information transmission channels through the use of high-
speed information exchange systems.
The author of [36] is a supporter of a single hardware solution of the tasks. At
the same time, from the data provided in the work, it follows that, for example, for
communication, navigation, identification and radio intelligence, the requirements

for the performance of digital signal processors (DSPs) differ by a factor of 20, to the
performance of data processors (DPs)—200 times, to the memory capacity DP—5
× 104 times. This data once again confirms that it does not make sense to create
universal DSP and DP for the implementation of tasks by systems with various types
of information interaction.
The tasks of analysis and synthesis of OCSs of promising aircraft are described
in article [37]. It systematizes the work performed by the OCS in the REC, classes of
tasks, resources and technology, and examines the enlarged design of the design of
OCS. There is an expansion of the classes of tasks solved by the OCS of promising
aircraft in the field of signal processing and symbolic information processing.
In [38], proposals for the composition, technical requirements and appearance
of the RECs of fifth-generation airplanes are described. It is indicated that the
architecture of hardware-integrated RECs satisfies most fully the modern require-
ments. In accordance with this architecture, HIREC is divided into hardware-
completed components not by functional tasks, but by the type of operations with
signal fields. “However, the full-scale implementation of this concept in the fifth-
generation complexes is practically impossible, since it requires a science-intensive
and resource-intensive research and development program for a relatively long
period, as well as the development and production of the necessary computing
equipment at the level of world achievements in Russia” [38].
At the same time, there is a significant technical risk due to the high intellectual
and instrumental complexity of HIREC. Therefore, for the implementation of the fifth
generation of RECs, an “architecture with elements of a federal structure provides
for the synthesis of basic, unified and integration approaches to the construction of
the complex and its main hardware and software elements, which makes it much
easier to solve many problems of creating complex of the airborne equipment in
conditions of extremely limited financial resources, as well as to ensure the operation
and modernization of the existing fleet of aviation complexes with elements of the
system architecture of the new-generation airborne equipment being developed.”
The proposed architecture provides:
• integration of radio frequency devices in four subranges: “A”—identification,
communication, navigation, EW; “B”—radar, radio intelligence, communica-
tions, EW; “C”—radio intelligence, EW; “D”—radar in the millimeter range;
• data exchange between processors across multiple buses in a system in which all
processors are connected to all buses, and the use of a hierarchical structure at the
subsystem level;
• functional separation of the REC to the main systems associated with the
processing, integration and management of information, with the management
of combat missions and with the management of the complex;
• implementation of four types of computing modules: signal processing, solving
classification problems, solving intellectual support problems, universal type;
• the use of high-speed information exchange systems;
• modular design;
• open architecture to build capacity in function, performance and reliability;

• adaptation (dynamic reconfiguration) to the conditions of operation through the
redistribution of resources between the information channels of the complex.
As the main hardware-integrated information channels, RECs are offered:

“a universal multifunctional radiotechnical system providing the functions of
targeting, reconnaissance, counteraction and communication, which is based
almost on all known algorithms and methods of radar, including adaptive space–
time processing, methods of energy and functional secrecy, broadband direc-
tional and non-directional microwave communication, high-precision direction
finding and classification of microwave radiation sources, effective high-potential
radio-resistance, remote control weapon handling”;
basic multifunctional optoelectronic surveillance and sighting system, based on
the use of information from thermal imaging, television, laser subsystems;
integrated communication, navigation, identification and landing system, which
provides information support for the performance of combat missions and the
safe flight of the aircraft at all its stages;
integrated system of intelligence and counteraction;
passive targeting system for information on radiation sources;
a group piloting support system for group actions;
millimeter range radar system;
a system for diagnosing, monitoring and controlling the technical condition of the
equipment;
several artificial intelligence systems [38].
Thus, in this paper, the REC has been proposed, which has a distributed–central-
ized architecture, built on a number of multifunctional and unified systems, and has
modularity, multi-level and openness architecture of the computing environment.
The architecture of computing systems for modular avionics of promising aircraft
is considered in more detail in [39]. Noting the shortcomings of federated architec-
tures that have created the need to create new concepts for building avionics, the
authors believe that the basic principles of building integrated RECs defining its
appearance for the next decade are:
“modular, open, microprocessor-independent architecture of airborne computer,
which provides for the upgrading of the ICE, the ability to increase computing
resources and compatibility of products from different manufacturers;
distributed signal and data processing based on multiprocessor computing facili-
ties in the distributed architecture of the ICE and the use of a distributed multitasking
real-time operating system;
the use of high-speed information channels and interfaces for intersystem, inter-
module and intramodule interface and standard high-speed channels for transmitting
streams of digital signals from sensors;
use of software development technology based on certified high-level languages,
software modules and layout programming of application systems from certified
software components with standardized interfaces;
use of unified modules (nodes) as constructive-replaceable units of avionics

instead of blocks with a standard control interface, an increase due to this
maintainability and combat readiness of equipment” [39].
Systems with an open architecture are understood to be systems consisting
of components with well-defined standard interfaces. The requirement of open
architecture extends to both hardware and software components of the equipment.
According to the authors of [39], the main elements of the REC architecture
should be a distributed information and computing environment and a programmable
communication environment of signals and data. They link together a flight control
system containing ACS, sensors of navigation and flight information; informa-
tion display and management system; combat mission control and weapon control
system; and system of technical and functional diagnostics. Thus, the basic functional
subsystems of the RECs are preserved.
“Sensors and executive bodies of functional subsystems of the REC are divided
into low-speed and high-speed digital information flows. For transmission of low-
speed information flows (up to 1 … 10 Mbit/s) in the structure of the programmed
switching medium, digital backbone serial channels can be used that are charac-
teristic of modern airborne local networks (e.g., MIL-STD-1553, STANAG 3910).
This ensures the continuity of the architecture, the so-called backward compatibility
of a new-generation complex with manufactured devices and subsystems, and the
possibility of a phased evolutionary transition to new-generation complexes.
The streams of high-speed digital signals from the ADC airborne informa-
tion sensors, including multifunctional and other airborne radars of various wave-
lengths, radiotechnical, optoelectronic and other sensors, are fed to the programmable
switching medium”[39].
The information and computing environment have an open architecture, a modular
scalable structure and a dynamically reconfigurable logical organization. It is built
as a multiprocessor system of distributed signal and data processing based on unified
processing modules, memory, video processors and standard interfaces.
The principles of construction show that the proposed architecture of integrated
RECs is close to the Pave Pace architecture.
The work [40] describes the main tasks that are assigned to the computer system
of integrated REC in civil and military aviation. Their implementation is provided by
two levels of software: system (executive software) and application (functional target
software). System software must run as independent as possible of the hardware on
which it is implemented, and application software must be completely independent
of the computing tools and interfaces. At the same time, the application software
should not depend on the system software and vice versa. These positions repeat the
requirements of the ARINC 651.
The application software of airborne complexes of civil aircraft implements three
levels (“layers”) of tasks.
The first layer is formed by the tasks of receiving and converting information from
aircraft navigation sensors (inertial, radio engineering, aerometric) and controlling
sensors, communications equipment and partly airborne equipment.
The second layer is formed by the tasks of complex information processing (CIP)
with statistical control and making decisions about the state of the complex based
on CIP.
The third layer consists of the following tasks:
• optimization of aircraft flight modes in horizontal and vertical planes and in the
longitudinal channel;
• construction of routes and flight profiles on the route and in the region of aero-
dromes in accordance with a given flight program, information from the navigation
database and ATC collectives;
• regulation of the center of mass of the aircraft relative to a given trajectory;
• regulation of motion relative to the center of mass (autopilot functions);
• interaction with the crew through the complex control panel;
• display information on the display;
• prevention of aircraft collisions with indication of the flight situation in the area
of the aircraft;
• warning of dangerous proximity to the ground;
• warning of critical flight modes;
• interaction with terrestrial air traffic services, etc.
For military aviation, a number of target tasks are added to all three layers of
applied software. On the first layer, a large number of tasks of sighting/sighting
systems are added, which are combined depending on the type of aircraft (optoelec-
tronic, optical television, radar, infrared, etc.), which require specialized processors
to carry out the initial processing of signal amount of preprocessing information.
The logic of operation control of the airborne equipment is significantly complicated,
which is connected with the need to ensure secrecy and electromagnetic compatibility
during operation of a large number of types of avionics.
On the second layer, the tasks of the CIP sighting/aiming systems, exhibitions
of inertial systems, the tasks of implementing the correlation-extremal navigation
methods, etc., are added.
On the third layer, target tasks are added, interaction tasks with the crew through
the control panels, the display on the windshield, etc.
In [41], it is indicated that, according to expert estimates, the total required perfor-
mance of computing facilities of a prospective military aircraft can be estimated at
tens of thousands of MIPS. For civil aircraft, this estimate is much less. Similarly, in
tens of GB, you can estimate the required memory capacity.
To solve the problems of integrated REC, [41] proposes the implementation of
a two-level airborne local computing network (LCN) based on high-performance
multicomputer computing systems, and a redundant global interface corresponding
to GOST R 50,832 (STANAG 3910) using various methods ensures failure sustain-
ability. It is assumed that multi-machine computing systems will have an open archi-
tecture, invariant to the applied element base, and have a capacity of up to 500 MIPS
to solve all the most difficult tasks of integrated REC.
The development of the ideas of work [40] is the methodology proposed in [41] for
the design of promising airborne systems for civil aviation, based on the achievement
of two system properties of the complex:
(1) almost reliable determination by the complex of its technical condition;
(2) practically guaranteed change by the complex of its architecture according
to the technical state and practically reliable performance of the functions
provided by this state.
Thus, as the main property that should be provided in the complex, [41] postu-
lates “failure resistance, ensuring the implementation of potential levels of accuracy,
reliability, control, security, control of the facility, power plants and support systems.”
It should be noted here that it is difficult, and often impossible, to establish a
direct connection of the given indicators in real equipment. For example, the accu-
racy of measuring navigation parameters in a very complex way depends on the
reliability indicators of equipment (e.g., in complex information processing) and
does not depend at all on other components of the complex concept of reliability.
Failure sustainability cannot ensure the realization of potential levels of accuracy,
which is determined mainly by the quality of signal processing algorithms in the
background of interference.
The construction of the complex is assumed on the basis of a fail-resistant infor-
mation management system (IMS), the main part of which is the airborne LCN. The
basic principles of building a LCN are:
• architecture of a LCN as a multi-machine computer network of autonomous intel-
ligent functional modules of high computing power and high-speed interfaces;
• independent hardware modules with approximately synchronous computing
processes;
• general system procedures for identifying computational processes in reserving
modules for comparing bit-per-bit results;
• separation of software from hardware;
• separation of functional software from system software;
• a distributed real-time operating system that defines the virtual architecture of a
LCN.
The basic principles of building an information management system are:

• implementation of information fault tolerance based on redundancy, the use of
various information sensors and its integrated processing;
• implementation of fault tolerance of object management, engines, life support
systems on the basis of their real models and real environment models with iden-
tification of navigation and flight sensors and feedback and using the results of
fault-tolerant CIP.
• When solving problems of designing a complex as a whole as an ergatic system,
the following should be created:
• expert security system that provides protection against abnormal actions of the
crew based on information about their psychophysical condition and the results
of IMS work;
• expert flight system, giving recommendations to the crew on flight situations;
• expert security system, giving recommendations to the crew and ground services
on the state of the complex.
In general, the proposed methodology replicates and develops the IMA design
ideas set forth in ARINC 651.
In [42], the task was to create an integrated airborne equipment complex of new
civil aircraft of Russia as a network information and control system in which the
integration of resources is carried out by organizing connections between its elements
based on network technology. It is indicated that the most effective will be complex,
in which:
“The computing resources in the maximum attainable degree are homogeneous,
and the relations between them are regular.
Participation in the replacement of the failed equipment can take in the limit
all computational resources: not only centralized, spatially concentrated within the
module (block, container) and united by the system bus, but also dispersed throughout
the aircraft and interconnected by information channels exchange.
The ability to handle any task with any computing resource is not limited to the
functional specialization of resources.
Sources of information (sensors) are available to all processing devices through
an integrated information exchange environment” [42].
The described approach is close to the concept of IMA, described in ARINC 651.
In contrast, it is proposed for equipment failures (e.g., in the computational core) to
use the computing resources of equipment not included in the IMA cabinets. Thus,
this approach is close to the positions of the authors of [31, 32]—supporters of the
full integration of the entire aviation REC. The principal features of the avionics
indicated in Chapter 1 are not considered in [42] and, accordingly, are not taken into
account.
In many works devoted to modern avionics, its most important attribute is consid-
ered to be the openness of the architecture. Open system technology is now recog-
nized worldwide as a key element in the construction of information and computing
systems of all levels and purposes. At the same time, the concept of an open system
is very vague and constantly changing. There is no single generally accepted defi-
nition of an open system. “For more than a quarter of a century, over 250 different
subcommittees and commissions have been involved in open system issues, and the
solution to this problem is still far from complete—the emergence of new software
and hardware, standards and the need to link them to each other continuously expands
the scope of work” [43].
One approach to the interpretation of open systems is reflected in the definition
of the Association of French Users of UNIX and Open Systems (AFUU): “An open
system is a system consisting of elements that interact with one another through
standard interfaces.” A similar definition is given in the Open Systems Guide for
Avionics of the ASSC Avionics Standardization Committee [44]. As rightly noted

in [43], such an approach, based only on the standardization of interfaces, hinders
the development of information and computing system architectures, in particular,
in airborne avionics.
In our opinion, a more productive approach is the formation of an integrated
avionics architecture based on the realization of its properties that provide benefits
to consumers and avionics manufacturers throughout the equipment life cycle. This
approach, reflected fully in the IMA concept of ARINC and developed in a number
of other studies mentioned above, does not come from abstract definitions of an
open system, but from the needs of aviation. In this regard, another definition is
symptomatic (IEEE POSIX 1003.0 Committee), which gives an interpretation of an
open system by listing a number of properties that almost coincide with those used
in ARINC 651 and other documents on the integration of avionics [43]:
extensibility/scalability;
portability of software;
interoperability—the ability to interact with systems from other suppliers;
the ability to interact with the user (driveability).
In [43], the properties of the airborne avionics as an open system are specified.
In addition to those already mentioned in the definition of IEEE POSIX 1003.0, two
more avionics features are analyzed that distinguish it from open general-purpose
systems: the provision of real-time mode and the need for high availability of airborne
computing systems. The analysis shows that the mechanical transfer of software and
hardware products of general-purpose computer technologies to airborne avionics
can not only reduce the efficiency of their use, but also create a threat to the safe
operation of the aircraft. In this regard, a comprehensive study of all aspects of the
use of COTS products at all stages of the design of airborne equipment is necessary.
On the whole, the analysis carried out above shows that Russian scientists and
developers adhere in many respects to common views on the principles of integration
of airborne avionics, especially those that should be used as the basis for designing
an airborne distributed computing system. These principles develop and concretize
the concept of airborne avionics as a complex hierarchical system, the integration
of which should provide a significant increase in fault tolerance, survivability of
airborne equipment to improve safety of flights, as well as a significant reduction in
life cycle costs, including operating costs.
At the same time, there are differences of opinion regarding the pace and depth of
integration of airborne avionics. When borrowing ideas from the Pave Pace program,
the specifics of various airborne equipment groups and the actual state of affairs with
its development in Russia are not taken into account. In particular, in the literature,
there is no elaboration of the principles for constructing integrated avionics of navi-
gation, landing, data exchange and air traffic control. Usually, authors are limited to
system-wide considerations that relate more to airborne computing facilities than to
radio equipment, which, as in ARINC 651, is considered simply as a radio frequency
converter. The materials presented in Chapter 4 of the book are intended to a certain
extent to fill this gap in research on the integration of airborne avionics.
References 101
References
1. Young L (1989) speaks out on critical technologies for defense. Microwave Syst News 9(9):39–
43
2. Critical weapon systems technologies noted. Military Res Lett 847:8 (1989)
3. Bochkarev AM, Strukov YP (1990) Bortovoe radioelektronnoe oborudovanie letatel’nyh
apparatov/Itogi nauki i tekhniki, Aviastroenie.-T.II.-M
4. Lukin VN, Mishchenko IN, Molochko SV (1987) Osnovnye napravleniya sozda-niya inte-
grirovannoj aviacionnoj bortovoj radioelektronnoj appa-ratury sistem svyazi, navigacii i
opoznavaniya v SSHA. Zarubezhnaya radioelektronika (8):3–22
5. Pavlov AM (2001) Principy organizacii bortovyh vychislitel’nyh sistem perspektivnyh
letatel’nyh apparatov. Mir komp’yuternoj avtomati-zacii 4:S25–S35
6. Boule D, Hewish M (1990) Avionics for the future. Defense Electronics Comput 2:53–55
7. Rhea J (1990) The next generation of avionics. Air Force Mag 73(1): 68, 70–72
8. Parr GR, Edwards R (1998) Integrated modular avionics. Aerosp Rev 68
9. Shiavoni AJ (1996) Military avionics fly off the shelf. Aerosp Am :28–32
10. Vysockij B, Vojnich B (1998) «Razumnaya obshivka». Perspektivy razvitiya bortovyh
radioelektronnyh system. Elektronika: nauka, tekhnologiya, biznes (3–4):S31–S33
11. J Electronic Defense (1989) 12(8)34–38, 40–42
12. Mnogofunkcional’naya aktivnaya FAR dlya perspektivnogo istrebitelya //In.pechat’ ob ekon.,
nauch.-tekhn. i voen. potenc. gos.-uchastn. SNG i tekhn.sredstvah ego vyyavl. Ser. Tekhn.
sredstva razved. sluzhb kap. gos. /VINITI (1998) (2):S33–S34
13. Military avionics fly off the shelf. Aerosp Am. 28–32, Feb 1996
14. Maher CM (1994) The DOD COTS directive—what about radiation hardness? Defense
Electronics 29–32
15. Pave Pace Integrated Avionics Architecture /Jane’s Defense Equipment Li-brary: Avionics,
1994–1995
16. Balyasnikov BN, Emel’yanova II (1989) Puti povysheniya effektivnosti radiotekhnicheskih
kompleksov MO SSHA. Zarubezhnaya radioelektroni-ka 7:S73–S81
17. ASAAC Phase 1: ASAAC Feasibility Study: Core Architecture Concept Definition, ASAAC
02, Issue 4, Feb 1994
18. ISO/IEC 7498-1. Information technology—open systems interconnection—basic reference
model (1994)
19. Integrated Communications Navigation Identification Avionics (ICNIA)/Jane’s Defense Equip-
ment Library: Avionics, 2002–2003
20. ARINC 651-1 «Design Guidance for Integrated Modular Avionics», Nov 1997
21. Gromov GN, Paholkov GA (1980) Principy organizacii kompleksov bortovo-go samoletnogo
oborudovaniya, obespechivayushchih povyshenie effektiv-nosti i nadezhnosti resheniya zadach
navigacii, posadki i UVD //Voprosy radioelektroniki. Ser.OT. Vyp.4. – 3–15. Gromov GN,
Pakholkov GA (1979) Organisation principles of integrated airborne equipment providing
higher efficiency and reliability of solution to navigation, landing and ATC problems //RTCA
paper № 383-81/RE-285/Washington
22. Mesarovic MD, Macko D, Takahara Y (1970) Theory of hierarchical multilevel systems.
Academic Press, New York and London (Perevod: Mesarovich M., Mako D., Takahara I.
Teoriya ierarhicheskih mnogourovnevyh sistem.-M.: Mir, 1973. – 344s)
23. Mesarovic MD (1965) Multilevel concept for systems engineering. Proceedings of Systems
Engineering Conference, Chicago, Ill
24. Mesarovic MD, Macko D (1969) Foundations for a scientific theory of hierarchical systems.
In: White WA (ed) Hierarchical structures. Elsevier, New York
25. Kulikovskij R (1971) Optimal’noe upravlenie slozhnymi ierarhicheskimi sistemami/Sb.
«Diskretnye samonastraivayushchiesya sistemy» (Trudy III kongressa IFAK, vyp.3). M.:
Nauka
26. Moiseev NN (1972) Informacionnaya teoriya ierarhicheskih sistem /Trudy 1-j Vsesoyuz. konf-
cii po issledovaniyu operacij. Minsk
27. Gel’fand IM, Cetlin ML (1966) O matematicheskom modelirovanii mekha-nizmov central’noj

nervnoj sistemy. Modeli strukturno-funkcional’noj organizacii. M.: Nauka
28. CHernigovskij V.N. Fiziologicheskij zhurnal SSSR (1969) №8
29. Koblov VL, YArlykov MS(1987) Principy postroeniya radioelektronnyh kompleksov inte-
gral’nogo tipa. Radiotekhnika 2:S20–S28
30. YArlykov MS (1995) Radioelektronnye kompleksy – sovremennyj etap raz-vitiya
radiotekhniki. Radiotekhnika (4–5):S134–S136
31. Androsov VA, Kutahov VP, Lavrov AA (1996) Arhitektura perspektivnogo aviacionnogo
radioelektronnogo kompleksa. Radiotekhnika 5:S18–S22
32. Androsov VA, Kutahov VP (1996) Arhitektura apparaturno integrirovanno-go radioelek-
tronnogo kompleksa. Radiotekhnika 9:S49–S54
33. Kulabuhov VS (1996) Variant oblika i arhitektury ergaticheskogo integri-rovannogo bortovogo
kompleksa letatel’nyh apparatov. Radiotekhnika 9:S65–S69
34. Halamov ASS, Bukov VN, Kulabuhov VS, Guzenko VG (1998) Nauchnye problemy komplek-
snyh issledovanij v oblasti sozdaniya i ekspluatacii bortovogo oborudovaniya LA na baze
informacionno-vychislitel’nyh setej. Nauch. vestnik MTGU GA. Ser. Avionika 3:S59–S74
35. Kulabuhov VS, Merkulov VA, CHigin GP (1999) Oblik mnogourovnevoj in-formacionnoj
sistemy bazovogo bortovogo kompleksa perspektivnyh letatel’nyh apparatov. Izvestiya RAN.
Teoriya i sistemy upravleniya 3:S146–S152
36. Kutahov VP (2002) Arhitektura radioavioniki letatel’nyh apparatov pyato-go pokoleniya.
Radiosistemy: Radioelektronnye kompleksy 1:S15–S19 (ZHurnal v zhurnale «Radiotekhnika»
№8).
37. Samarin OF (2003) Zadachi analiza i sinteza bortovyh vychislitel’nyh si-stem perspektivnyh
letatel’nyh apparatov. Radiosistemy: Radio-elektronnye kompleksy 1:S20–S24 (ZHurnal v
zhurnale «Ra-diotekhnika» №8)
38. Turchak A (1999) Arhitektura i osnovnye apparaturno - programmnye moduli kompleksa
aviacionnogo bortovogo oborudovaniya pyatogo pokoleniya. Mir avioniki №6
39. Turchak AA, Hernyshov EEC, Mihajluca KT, Hejnin YES (2002) Arhitektura vychislitel’nyh
sistem dlya integrirovannoj modul’noj avioniki perspektivnyh letatel’nyh apparatov. Radio-
sistemy: Radio-elektronnye kompleksy 2:S87–S95. (ZHurnal v zhurnale «Radiotekhnika»
№9)
40. Kofman MM, Suslov VD, Surov BI, Hek-Iovsepyanc RA (1999) Osnovnye tradicionnye i
netradicionnye zadachi kompleksirovaniya bortovogo oborudovaniya letatel’nyh ob"ektov. Mir
avioniki 6:S30–S33
41. Kofman MM, Paramonov PP, Sabo YI, Esin YF, Nebylov AV (2003) Me-todologiya proek-
tirovaniya perspektivnyh kompleksov bortovogo obo-rudovaniya grazhdanskoj aviacii. Trudy
X Sankt-Peterb. mezhd. konf-cii po integrirovannym navigacionnym sistemam 26–28 maya
2003g
42. Evgenov AV (2003) Napravleniya razvitiya integrirovannyh kompleksov bor-tovogo oboru-
dovaniya samoletov grazhdanskoj aviacii. Aviakosmicheskoe priborostroenie 3:S48–S53
43. Efanov VN, Bodrunov SD (2004) Otkrytye arhitektury v koncepcii avio-niki pyatogo
pokoleniya. Mir avioniki 5:S20–S28
44. Guidance on open systems for avionics. Avionic Systems Standardization Committee (ASSC).
Doc.No ASSC /110/5/1, July 2001
45. RTCA/DO-297 «Integrated Modular Avionics (IMA) Development Guidance and Certification
Considerations»
46. RTCA/DO-178B/EUROCAE ED-12 «Software Considerations in Airborne Systems and
Equipment Certification»
47. RTCA/DO-254/EUROCAE ED-80 «Design Assurance Guidance for Air-borne Electronic
Hardware»
Chapter 3
Functional Tasks of Integrated Airborne
Avionics
3.1 Criteria for the Selection of Functional Tasks
The brief overview of work in the field of integration of avionics, presented in Chap. 2
shows the importance of the problems faced by the domestic industry in developing
integrated avionics. The first of these problems is the rational choice of functional
tasks of the integrated avionics. Given the above analysis, the following criteria for
this choice can be formulated:
(1) It is necessary to integrate avionics related to the same type of information
interaction with external sources (consumers) of information.
This criterion allows us to take into account the sharp increase in the complexity
of avionics during the transition from a coordinated to antagonistic interaction. If
we distribute the main groups of avionics on this basis and compare this distribution
with their position in the aviation REC (Table 3.1), then we can conclude that the
avionics groups related to coordinated and indifferent types of interaction enter the
civilian aircraft as part of FNC, or, as radio stations, they are operated independently,
and on military aircraft, they are part of FNC and CCC. Therefore, integration within
one type of information interaction is almost equivalent to the integration of avionics
within each of the complexes identified in a typical aviation REC.
(2) It is necessary to ensure the operation of integrated avionics in the composition
of those systems that are the most promising and make the greatest contribution
to the effectiveness of aviation REC.
(3) The functional tasks of aviation REC in civil and military aviation are different;
therefore, the composition of the functional tasks of the integrated avionics will
be different.
(4) It is necessary to integrate the avionics systems of similar operating principles,
relatively close frequency ranges and information transfer rates in order to
achieve maximum uniformity of the structure of the integrated avionics.
104 3 Functional Tasks of Integrated Airborne Avionics
Table 3.1 Architecture containing hardware-integrated systems divided into complexes of a typical
REC
Functional avionics Airborne radio facility Complex as part of Type of information
group radio facility, which interaction with an
includes avionics external source
(consumer) of
information
Radio navigation RTC ATM (CRTS NS) FNC Conform
systems, avionics for
navigation and landing,
automatic direction
finder
Satellite navigation Space RTC and RTC FNC
ATM (CRTS NS)
ATC transponder RTC ATM (CRTS FNC
ATC)
TCAS II type ACAS RTC ATM (CRTS FNC
ATC)
IFF transponder of RTC ATM (CRTS –
civilian aircraft ATC)
IFF transponder of RTC ATM (CRTS CCC
military aircraft ATC)
IFF interrogator of – AC
military aircraft
Interaircraft navigation – FNC
systems
VHF (short-range RTC ATM –
communication)
HF (long-range RTC ATM –
communication)
DSDM, RA, WXR, – FNC Indifferent
CENS
Radar following the – AC
terrain, flying around
obstacles, mapping the
terrain, detecting
ground moving targets
Multifunction airborne – AC Antagonistic
radar, optoelectronic
systems
(5) It is necessary to ensure a reduction in the cost of the life cycle of the integrated
avionics in comparison with single-function equipment. Integration should
only be offered where guaranteed value is guaranteed.
(6) As a result of integration, it is necessary to drastically reduce the number of
intraflight information links.
3.1 Criteria for the Selection of Functional Tasks 105
(7) It is inadvisable to include in the integrated avionics the functional tasks of the
equipment, which has sufficiently good weight and size characteristics for its
separate performance, as well as operating continuously throughout the entire
flight.
It is also necessary to take into account a number of organizational and financial
constraints.
It should be noted that in a number of works devoted to the conceptual consid-
eration of the architecture of integrated avionics, the above-described avionics of
navigation, landing and air traffic control are not taken into account. It is considered
that all radiotechnical sensors are subject to integration irrespective of the frequency
range, sensor functions, etc. [1, 2]. At the same time, the experience of creating such
sensors (ICNIA, INEWS, IRST) for the F/A-22 aircraft itself showed that they were
developed separately for each of the three complexes identified in avionics. More-
over, even common modules developed for these sensors (e.g., a CIP processor) have
several configurations and are only partially uniform.
In the A3 architecture, the allocation of three functional areas is also preserved:
• central processor complex—about 100 modules of 10–15 types;
• communication, navigation and recognition complex—about 100 modules of 30–
40 types;
• combat mission management complex (functions of radar, EW, etc.)—80–120
modules of 50–60 types [3].
The presence of a significant number of module types shows that, despite the
declared desire to create universal modules, the A3 developers took into account the
significant specifics of avionics performing various functions.
It seems that when integrating, it is necessary to take into account not only the
desire to make the REC as homogeneous and versatile as possible, but also the need
for its effective operation as part of each of the systems, the airborne equipment of
which the REC include. This can be achieved, in our opinion, if the integration is
carried out within the limits of each of the complexes included in a typical REC. In
particular, the integration of avionics for navigation, landing, data exchange and air
traffic control is advisable to carry out within the FNC.
A position similar to ours is presented in article [4]. At the beginning of the
article, it is said that the architecture of hardware-integrated REC, which is based
on the creation of common hardware elements for all information channels, meets
the most complete requirements. However, the idea is further developed that the
full-scale implementation of this concept in fifth-generation airborne equipment is
practically impossible due to significant financial and practical difficulties, as well
as due to a high degree of technical risk. Therefore, for the implementation of the
fifth generation of RECs, an architecture has been proposed that contains hardware-
integrated systems, which are, in fact, separated by a typical REC complex.
Currently, in Russia, programs similar to Pave Pillar or Pave Pace are being imple-
mented. As noted in the introduction, there is a clear tendency to integrate not only
the avionics for navigation, landing, data exchange and air traffic control, but also
all existing RNS, and the formation of a single radio navigation field of Russia [5,
6]. A reflection of this trend is, in particular, the fact that the Russian radio naviga-
tion plans formulate, among other things, tasks whose solution is connected with the
integration of the RNS.
When performing work on a program like Pave Pace, the Russian system integrator
will face a number of problems, the solution of which, in our opinion, largely depends
on the success of the program.
(1) The architecture of integrated avionics depends largely on the possibility of
creating a unified family of typical modules for processing signals and data of
various systems. When creating a universal DSP that belongs to this family, one
should take into account the structure of signal processing algorithms of various
systems, since it determines the effectiveness of a DSP architecture. It is well
known, for example, that DSP matrix architectures, which are necessary for
high-speed processing of radar signals and in radio-resistance systems, are not
sufficiently effective in implementing various algorithms with a low degree of
regularity, with dependence on data and requiring you-completion of floating
point operations. Transpurters are undesirable to use when performing data
shifts, bitwise comparisons [7].
If this is not taken into account, then you can create a universal DSP for all radio
engineering aviation systems of the super-per-computer level, but it will require
cooling, it will be very expensive, and when processing signals from a number of
systems, it will have excessive performance and memory, and during processing
signals of other systems—low effective performance.
At the same time, several DSPs with different architectures can be created with
breakdown into avionics classes and with characteristics adapted to the signals and
algorithms of each class, and as a result, the aggregate of these DSPs will have smaller
masses, dimensions, consumption and cost.
(2) The ability to implement a program like Pave Pace (Architecture A3 ) largely
depends on the possibilities of creating new multifunctional antenna systems,
since the architecture of an integrated avionics is determined by how closely it
succeeds in approaching digital processing to the antenna system. In the USA,
in parallel with the development of integrated avionics, corresponding to the
A3 architecture, the ASAP program was carried out, the purpose of which
was the development of a wide-band, electronically controlled antenna built
into the aircraft design based on the MIMIC technology. During the program,
a concept was developed, a technical approach was defined, and demonstra-
tion tests of a distributed aperture antenna were carried out to perform the
functions of a receiving–transmitting radar array, electronic reconnaissance
systems, electronic countermeasures and communications.
(3) Foreign avionics specialists note that due to the reduction of government mili-
tary orders since 1990, the acquisition and long-term supply of electronic
3.1 Criteria for the Selection of Functional Tasks 107
components with technologies that meet military requirements have deterio-

rated significantly in recent years [8]. Therefore, currently available (commer-
cially available) commercial components (Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS))
are widely used in avionics. The following issues are in focus:
• comparison of specific military and specific commercial/industrial require-
ments;
• determining the field of avionics in which the COTS components can be
used;
• development of options for the implementation of integrated avionics
modules on COTS components (this is the focus of, in particular, stage
1 of phase II of the ASAAC program);
• development of alternative areas of acceptance and ensuring the long-term
supply of components.
The choice of electronic COTS components for integrated avionics can signifi-
cantly affect its architecture.
(4) There are problems associated with the development of algorithms and soft-
ware (software). Even within the framework of the Pave Pace program, it was
recognized that creating software for a multi-engine OCS consisting of a super-
computer for all functions embedded in an integrated REC would require very
large labor costs and multimillion dollar (in US dollars) capital investments.
A less expensive solution may be the implementation of the development of
integrated avionics in those collectives that have traditionally been engaged in
the development of appropriate single-functional equipment.
3.2 Justification of the Choice of Functional Tasks

of Modern Integrated Avionics for Promising Civil
Aircraft and Military Aircraft
3.2.1 The Concept of ICAO Complex of Communications,

Navigation and Surveillance for Air Traffic
Management (CNS/ATM)
Prospects for the international development of communications, navigation and

ATM civil aviation are largely determined by the concept developed in the 90s of
the last century by the Special Committee on Future Aviation Navigation Systems
(FANS) ICAO. To implement the concept, an Ad Hoc Committee was set up at
ICAO to monitor and coordinate the development and planning of the transition to a
future communications, navigation, surveillance and air traffic management system
(CNS/ATM). Since then, this system has been gradually being created in various
ICAO regions.
According to the international classification, ATM includes ground and air

services. The effective functioning of ATM provides for the close interaction of
these two services on the basis of international rules, procedures, requirements and
recommendations. The main and most important component of ATM is the air traffic
control (ATC) complex. In addition to ATC, ATM functions include Air Traffic Flight
Management—ATFM and Air Traffic Space Management—ATSM. In the aggregate,
the three listed ATM components should ensure maximum efficiency in the use of
airspace. The most important condition for ensuring this efficiency is a consistent
data exchange between the ground and airborne components of the ATM.
Various components of both national and international air traffic control systems
should be unified to ensure a uniform, continuous and efficient service for all users
from take-off to landing, taking into account the need to coordinate the actions of
the ATM services when the aircraft crosses the national borders.
The development of new-generation ATM hardware is based on the principles
of separation of responsibility and joint decision-making, providing guaranteed safe
airborne deployment in the airspace and observance of the fundamental conditions of
ATC: “to see (hear) and be visible (audible).” The developed concept of CNS/ATM
should in the future provide a transition to free flight (“Free Flight”) at the most
favorable trajectories for users instead of regulated separation.
In the future, global airspace should be legally proclaimed a common area for
long-haul and cargo aircraft, business and local aviation, GA and military aviation,
for the latter—within national or regional air basins. Therefore, in creating new
equipment that implements the concept of CNS/ATM, all types of aviation should
be equally interested.
The main provisions of the global concept of CNS/ATM in the use of specific
systems can be summarized as follows [9]:
Communication
• Continued use and improvement of VHF voice communication as the main one
in many continental dispatcher areas and increased digital voice channels.
• Replacing HF communication with L-band satellite communication with time.
• Development of the Aeronautical Telecommunication Network—ATN.
• Development of data link (DL) of mode S of the secondary surveillance radar
(SSR) for ATM in nodal areas and in some other areas with high air traffic density.
Navigation
• Gradual implementation of area navigation capabilities (RNAV) in accordance
with the criteria for required navigation performance (RNP) [10].
• The introduction of technologies based on the use of the global navigation satellite
system (GNSS), the basis of which is currently made up by the SRNS GPS and
GLONASS. Development and implementation of the GNSS functional add-on
subsystems: the ABAS aviation subsystem, the SBAS satellite subsystem, the
GBAS ground subsystem, which increase the GNSS integrity.
3.2 Justification of the Choice of Functional Tasks of Modern … 109
• Use of the existing radio navigation systems. Existing RNS, providing navigation
on the route and guidance with inaccurate approaches, meeting the conditions
of the RNP, will be able to work in conjunction with satellite radio navigation
systems. The gradual removal of the existing RNS from operation depends on
many factors, among which the introduction and quality of new systems are
crucial. ICAO takes a balanced approach to decommissioning and will plan this
process.
• Approach and landing assurance systems. ICAO confirmed for an indefinite period
the simultaneous operation of three international landing systems: ILS, MLS and
GLS (GNSS-based landing systems).
Navigation in the vertical plane will be provided by a barometric pressure
altimeter, except for very high altitudes, where GNSS can be used.
Surveillance
• In high-density areas of the continental airspace, high-density traffic will use SSR
A/C and S modes.
• The need for primary radars for ATM will be reduced. There is still a need for
them for other purposes, including monitoring weather conditions.
• Automatic dependent surveillance (automatic dependant surveillance—ADS) will
be used as:
additional and reserve funds in relation to SSR;

replacement of primary radars;
a major ATM facility in areas where there is no SSR;
Ground surveillance requires a wider range of capabilities than ground
surveillance radar.
Related systems
The airborne collision avoidance system (ACAS) can provide information to flight
crews and close flying aircraft and, as a last resort, prevent collisions in the event of
serious errors or erroneous actions. ACAS should not be considered as a substitute
for ATC service.
The concept of CNS/ATM is described in detail in ICAO documents and in [9].
Stages of development of CNS in Europe are given in Table 3.2.
There are procedures for the consistent development of the Air Navigation Plan
of the European Region (EUR ANP). In particular, periodic European Regional Air
Navigation Meetings deal with the development of a European CNS/ATM support
plan. This plan includes the following aspects:
(1) Strategy for satellite-based CNS systems.
The policy of the European Organization for the Safety of Air Navigation (EURO-
CONTROL) with respect to satellite navigation is consistent with the ICAO
GNSS policy. There must be an evolutionary transition from the existing GPS
Table 3.2 Stages of development of CNS in Europe

Airspace Function Periods
type Existing systems Step A Step B
1990–2005 2000–2015
High Navigation Omega/VHF, Existing systems + GNSS, GNSS,
traffic NDB, RNAV/RNP, ILS/MLSa RNAV/RNP,
areas VOR/DME, baro baro altimeter,
altimeter, INS/IRS,
INS/IRS, ILS NDBb , VORc ,
DMEd , MLS
Communication VHF voice VHF voice Similar to step
communication, communication/transmission A
UHF voice data, UHF voice
communicatione communicatione , voice
communication/transmission
AMSS dataf , SSR mode S
data transmission
Surveillance Primary Primary radar/SSR − A + C SSR—modes
radar/SSR modes + S modes A + C + S,
A + C, location ADS, primary
voice messages radarg
Other Navigation Similar to high traffic areas
areas Communication VHF voice Existing systems + voice Similar to step
communication, communication/transmission A
UHF voice of AMSS dataf
communicatione ,
HF speech
communicationh
Surveillance Similar to high Primary radar + monopulse SSR—modes
traffic areas SSR, location voice A + C + S,
messages, ADS ADS, primary
radar (approx.
7)
a ILS use is protected until 01/01/1998 (currently extended)
b NDB equipment will be phased out
c VOR equipment will be phased out
d DME equipment can be used as a backup for GNSS
e UHF communications are used to communicate with military aircraft and aircraft in search and
rescue
f AMSS—aeronautical mobile-satellite service
g The need for a primary radar is reduced where SSR is used
h Voice HF communication is used at low altitudes, in the open sea, polar regions
and GLONASS systems to the creation of a unified GNSS, which will be under
international control.
The European Union (EU) is interested in creating the European GNSS element.
In 1995, the Group of the Tripartite Union was formed, which included the EU, the
European Space Agency and EUROCONTROL. The main task of the group is to unite
efforts in developing documents of the advanced GNSS system, which includes the
European Geostationary Navigation Services (EGNOS) and the GALILEO system.
(2) Continuation of work on the introduction of ACAS.
(3) A possible option to improve the surveillance function is the integration of
automatic dependent surveillance systems and secondary surveillance radar
(ADS/SSR). The implementation of this issue is monitored by the EANPG.
(4) Solving the problem of VHF band congestion in the European region
(coordinated implementation of 8.33 kHz voice channel spacing).
(5) In relation to the transition from ILS to new precise approach and landing
systems, the position of ICAO is taken and the urgent need to promote the devel-
opment of multi-mode landing receivers (MMR), providing landing on any of
the three systems ILS, MLS, GLS. The MLS system is implemented where
and if it is necessary to maintain the required minimum levels of categories
II/III.
Since 1998 ECAC, EUROCONTROL and ICAO have introduced new rules for
avionics, which determine the solution of the following problems:
• provision of FM interference immunity (ICAO, Appendix 10)—1998;
• introduction of basic zone navigation B-RNAV (RNP-5)—1998;
• implementation of the WGS-84 coordinate system—1998;
• introduction of a voice coder in the cockpit—1998;
• introduction of VHF communication channels with a discrete 8.33 kHz—1999;
• reduction of vertical separation minima—1999;
• introduction of TCAS II ACAS (ACAS II)—1999–2000;
• implementation of the defendant mode S—2001;
• introduction of accurate area navigation P-RNAV (RNP1)—2005;
• development of the aviation telecommunication network—the term is not defined.
In the field of landing systems, the USA abandoned MLS in the hope that by early
2000, the GPS system would be able to replace ILS. In Europe, it was recognized
that their equipment ILS by 2000–2002 falls below the requirements of categories I
or II, and at the same time, MLS is only a short-term solution to support category III.
MMR can be a long-term solution to landing problems. The GPS receiver, which is
part of the MMR, can also support FMCS, RNAV, TCAS and ADS.
Mandatory use of the ACAS system (TCAS II) with software version 7.0 is
established for the European space from 01/01/2000.
The introduction of the transponder mode S is carried out in 2000–2005:
Since 01/01/2000, all new aircraft must be level 4.
From 01.01.2001, all new aircraft must have level 4 and the ability to “Transfer
parameters of the aircraft” (Downlink Aircraft Parameters—DAP).
From 01.01.2003, all aircraft must be level 2 and DAP.
From 01.01.2005, all aircraft must be level 4 and DAP.
3.2.2 The Concept of Zone Navigation and the Required

Navigation Characteristics
It was recognized that “the main task of navigation is to bring a moving object along
the optimal (most advantageous for these conditions) trajectory to a given point or
region of space at a given time” [11]. However, all over the world, flights of airplanes
are carried out along established air routes, and this process is strictly regulated. A
few decades ago, the notion of “Zonal Navigation” (RNAV) emerged, which meant a
navigation method that allows aircraft to fly within the range of radio beacon facilities
or within the limits determined by the capabilities of autonomous vehicles, or their
combinations.
As a result of the application of RNAV methods, operational efficiency has
increased, which has made it possible to develop navigation application processes
for use in various regions of the world and for all phases of flight. These processes
can potentially be expanded to ensure the management of ground operations.
Requirements for navigation application processes on specific routes or within
specific airspace should be formulated clearly and concisely. This is necessary to
ensure that the flight crew and air traffic controllers (ATC) are aware of the capabilities
of the airborne RNAV system to determine the compliance of the characteristics of
the RNAV system with the requirements of a specific airspace.
RNAV systems evolved in the same way as route and pattern systems based
on traditional ground-based facilities. The specific RNAV system was determined,
and through analysis and flight tests, its characteristics were evaluated. Abroad, in
domestic flights, radio beacon systems VOR and DME were used to determine the
location of the aircraft, while inertial reference systems (IRS) were used for flights
in oceanic areas. These systems were developed, evaluated and certified. Based on
the characteristics of the equipment available, the criteria for airspace and the height
of the obstacle span were developed, and the technical requirements were based
on the existing technical capabilities. In some cases, it was necessary to identify
specific types of equipment that could be operated in the airspace. Such prescriptive
requirements have led to delays in the introduction of RNAV systems with new
capabilities and to higher costs of maintaining the appropriate certification. In order
to avoid such prescriptive requirements, an alternative method has been proposed for
determining equipment requirements by setting performance requirements. This is
called performance-based navigation (PBN).
In the process of developing area navigation methods, the ICAO Special
Committee on Future Aeronautical Systems (FANS) found that the most widely
used method for many years to determine the required navigation capability was
the mandatory presence of specific equipment on board. This condition did not
allow optimal use of modern airborne equipment. In order to solve this problem,
the committee developed the concept of capabilities of required navigation perfor-
mance (RNPC). FANS has defined the RNPC as a parameter characterizing lateral
deviations from a given or selected track line, as well as positioning accuracy along
the track line based on the corresponding retention level.
The concept of RNPC was approved by the ICAO Council and aimed at further
development by the Group of Experts to Review the General Concept of Separation
(RGCSP). In 1990, the RGCSP Group found that capabilities and characteristics are
completely different parameters, and airspace planning depends on the measured
characteristics, rather than on the design capabilities, and replaced the RNPC with
the required navigation characteristics (RNP). The RGCSP then further developed
the RNP concept and included the navigation characteristics necessary for operations
within a specific airspace (see Reference [10] in Chapter 1). It was proposed that a
specific type of RNP determines the compliance of the navigation characteristics of
all users within a given airspace with the navigation capabilities available within that
airspace. The types of RNPs were to be determined by a single precision value, as
suggested by the FANS Committee. Although such an approach seemed to be suit-
able for use in remote and oceanic areas, for the use of RNAV in continental areas,
appropriate guidance for dividing routes turned out to be insufficient. This was due to
a number of factors, including the introduction of standards for airborne navigation
systems in terms of performance and functionality, working conditions, taking into
account the limitations of the available airspace, the use of more reliable means of
communication, surveillance and provision of ATM, and the earliest possible return
on the installed equipment. This has led to the development of various specifica-
tions of the navigation capability with overall navigation accuracy. It was noted that
this development will most likely not cease with the development of vertical (3D)
navigation and time (4D) navigation and their subsequent use by ATM services to
increase the capacity and efficiency of airspace.
In view of the above considerations, the organizations responsible for the initial
implementation of RNAV flights in continental airspace faced serious difficulties.
In the course of solving these difficulties, significant problems arose regarding an
unambiguous understanding of the concept, terminology and definitions. As a result,
the implementation proceeded in various ways, which resulted in a lack of consistency
in the application of the RNP.
In 2003, the ICAO Air Navigation Commission, in deciding on the recom-
mendations of the 4th meeting of the Global Navigation Satellite System Expert
Group (GNSSP), appointed the Research Collective on Required Navigation Perfor-
mance and Specific Operational Requirements (RNPSORSG) to coordinate consid-
eration of several issues related to the required navigation characteristics (RNP). The
RNPSORSG Group reviewed the ICAO RNP concept, taking into account the expe-
rience of initial application, as well as current industry trends, the requirements of
interested parties and the implementation in the regions. She agreed on the relation-
ship between RNP and the functionality and application processes of area navigation
systems (RNAV) and developed the PBN concept, which will allow for global harmo-
nization of the existing types of implementation and create a basis for coordinating
future operations. A “Performance-Based Navigation Guide (PBN)” (see Reference
[41] in Chapter 1) was developed, replacing the “Guide to Required Navigation
Performance (RNP)” (see Reference [10] in Chapter 1).
Currently, zone navigation (RNAV) is a navigation method that allows aircraft to
fly for years along any desired trajectory within the coverage area of the navigation
aids based on the base stations or within the limits determined by the capabilities
of the autonomous facilities, or a combination of these. Area navigation includes
performance-based navigation, as well as other types of operations that do not fall
under the definition of navigation based on performance (see Reference [41] in
Chapter 1).
Performance-based navigation is a zone navigation based on the performance
requirements of the aircraft performing an ATS flight, instrument approach pattern
or a flight in a specified airspace. Performance requirements are defined in the navi-
gation specifications in the form of accuracy, integrity, continuity, readiness and
functionality required to perform the planned flight in the context of the concept of
a specific airspace.
The set of requirements for the aircraft and the flight crew that are necessary to
ensure flights in conditions of navigation, based on the characteristics, within the
established airspace is called the navigation specification. There are two types of
navigation specifications:
The RNAV specification is a navigation specification based on zone navigation,
which does not include the requirement for monitoring the maintenance and
issuing warnings of non-compliance with characteristics; denoted by the prefix
RNAV, for example, RNAV 5, RNAV 1.
The RNP specification is a navigation specification based on area navigation,
which includes a requirement for monitoring the maintenance and issuance of
warnings about non-compliance with characteristics; denoted by the prefix RNP,
for example, RNP 4, RNP ARCH.
Detailed guidance material on navigation specifications is provided in (see
Reference [41] in Chapter 1).
One of the decisive factors in choosing a specific navigation specification is
the navigation functional requirements. Navigation function—a detailed descrip-
tion of the navigation system’s capabilities (e.g., performing transitions from one
flight segment to another, possibility of parallel displacement, flight patterns in the
waiting area, navigation databases)—required to comply with the requirements of
the airspace concept. The navigation functional requirements for each navigation
specification are contained in (see Reference [41] in Chapter 1).
The application of the navigation specification and the associated infrastructure
of the navigation aids on routes, in charts and/or in a certain volume of airspace in
accordance with the intended concept of airspace, constitutes the navigation appli-
cation process. It is one of the elements, along with communication, observation
and ATM procedures, which meet the strategic objectives for this particular airspace
concept.
In accordance with the above definitions, the PBN manual distinguishes between
RNAV and RNP systems. The RNAV system is a navigation system that allows
aircraft to fly along any desired trajectory within the area of operation of the navi-
gation which aids based on the base stations or within the limits determined by
the capabilities of the autonomous vehicles, or a combination of these. An RNAV
system can be an integral part of a flight control system (FMS). The RNP system is
an aeronautical navigation system that provides airborne control for maintaining the
characteristics and issuing warnings about their non-compliance.
Performance-based navigation has several advantages over the sensor-based
method of developing airspace criteria and obstacle clearance. For example, PBN:
(a) reduces the need for technical support of routes and schemes based on specific
sensors, as well as associated costs;
(b) eliminates the need to develop operations based on specific sensors each time
new navigation systems appear, which would be costly. As expected, the
increased use of satellite navigation will further facilitate the installation of
various types of RNAV systems on various aircraft;
(c) allows to increase the efficiency of use of airspace (organization of routes, fuel
efficiency, noise reduction, etc.);
(d) explain how RNAV systems are used;
(e) simplifies the operational approval process for operators by providing a limited
set of navigation specifications for global use.
The construction of conventional circuits is used in application processes that are
not based on RNAV, when aircraft navigation is carried out using direct signals from
ground-based radio navigation aids. The disadvantage of this type of navigation is
that the routes depend on the location of the navigation beacons. As a result, the length
of the routes increases, since it is almost impossible to establish the optimal arrival
and departure routes due to the limitations associated with choosing the location of
ground radio navigation aids and the associated costs. In addition, obstacle protection
zones are relatively large, and the navigation system error increases as a function of
the aircraft to distance from the navigation aid.
The introduction of RNAV allows for the construction of routes with less depen-
dence on the location of navigation aids, as a result of which the construction of the
schemes can better take into account the requirements for planning of the airspace.
An outstanding achievement in the application of RNAV was the creation of control
points defined by name, width and longitude, which allows storing routes in the
navigation database.
Despite the advantages, RNAV had a number of issues and characteristics that
needed to be taken into account. Such was in some cases a wide range of differences
in flight performance and in the flight paths of the aircraft. This led to the creation
of large obstacle assessment areas, and as a result, it was not possible to get signifi-
cant benefits from reducing the obstacle protection area. As experience was gained
during RNAV flights, other important differences and characteristics were found.
The airborne equipment RNAV, the functionality and configuration of the systems
varied from simple to complex (see Reference [41] in Chapter 1). One of the ways
to reduce diversity in airborne equipment RNAV was the creation of integrated radio
navigation equipment (multi-sensor systems).
In area navigation using PBN, navigation schemes will be developed not for
specific sensors, but in accordance with the navigation specification (e.g., RNAV 1).
The use of integrated avionics will allow the aircraft to use different specifications
without replacing the airborne equipment.
The use of performance-based navigation is currently limited to operations with

linear lateral performance requirements and time constraints. For this reason, oper-
ations with angular lateral characteristics requirements (i.e., approach and landing
with vertical guidance for the GNSS APV-I and APV-II characteristic levels, as well
as the exact approach for landing and landing on ILS/MLS/GLS) are not considered
in (see Reference [41] in Chapter 1).
In USSR civil aviation, zonal navigation became fundamentally possible with the
appearance of the RSBN system in the early 60s of the last century. The presence
on board of metering device made it possible to fly along the track line that did not
pass through the location of the beacon. However, this method of navigation did
not find widespread use, since, on the one hand, there was no complete overlap of
RSBN work areas on the territory of the USSR, and on the other hand, due to strict
requirements from air traffic control flight on established airways [9].
RNP compliance can be achieved in a variety of ways, and neither the state nor the
aircraft operator is limited in how to comply with the RNP, if they can demonstrate
the ability to fulfill the requirements. The main way to ensure RNP is to use RNAV
systems that are already widely used. Currently, there are many different types of
navigation equipment that will meet the requirements of one or more types of RNP.
This includes:
(a) airborne equipment of non-autonomous RNS, for example, VOR/DME,
DME/DME, RSBN, GNSS, LORAN-C;
(b) autonomous RNS, for example, inertial reference systems (IRS).
Navigation avionics can be part of a comprehensive system that includes an FMS
with a navigation database and a database of aircraft characteristics. Such a system is
referred to in the ICAO manual as a navigation management system (age management
system).
ICAO has determined that FMS, along with less complex types of RNAV
equipment, can be used to provide RNP.
RNAV and FMS equipment can be approved by governments as navigation aids
in the designated RNP airspace. The list of the minimum composition of the main
equipment of ICAO includes VOR/DME, LORAN-C, INS, DME/DME and GNSS.
In Russia, fixed assets of zonal navigation should include the equipment of the
national system—RSBN, whose use in the airspace of Russia corresponds to the
use of VOR/DME in the airspace of other countries. The precision characteristics of
navigation on both systems are close and, as shown below, satisfy, at a minimum,
the requirements of RNP-4.
According to [12], the values of the instrumental errors of the correction of naviga-
tion computers (with a probability of 0.95) on Tu-154 and Il-86 aircraft at a distance
of 370 km from the radio beacons are:
for VOR/DME = (0.5—2.0) km,
for RSBN = (0.5—1.75) km.
The permissible value of the aircraft control error for the routes along the route
is estimated in ICAO document Doc.9613 as follows:
with the command flight instrument control unit 1 = 0.93 km;

when driving with autopilot, 2 = 0.463 km.
Using the method of calculating the budget of errors, adopted in Doc.9613, we find
that for flights en route with a probability of 0.95, the error keeping the position
of the aircraft is equal to:
(a) for navigation on VOR/DME
= (1.06—2.21) km with gearbox control;

= (0.68—2.05) km when controlled by autopilot;
(b) for navigation under RSBN
= (1.06–1.98) km with gearbox control;

= (0.68–1.81) km with control using autopilot.
Thus, these errors with probability 1 fall within the limits of 7408 km, which
characterize the RNP-4 type, and for RSBN, when controlled by the autopilot, within
the limits of 1852 km, which characterize the RNP-1 type.
ICAO recognizes the use of several DME stations (at least two) as the most
accurate of the main RNAV facilities, accepted without operational restrictions, for
continental airspace. According to [13], the multi-dimensional DME mode provides
RNAV accuracy, almost equal to the accuracy provided by GPS. Since it is known
that RSBN is not inferior to DME/N in terms of accuracy of range measurement, it
is advisable to implement the multi-range RSBN mode.
The multi-range RSBN mode could become for Russia the most accurate basic
means of RNAV, accepted without operational restrictions.
As one of the desirable functions of the RNAV equipment corresponding to the
RNP, ICAO recommends an automatic selection of navigation aids, providing, in
particular, the reception of signals from radio navigation beacons with the best
geometric factor. If RSBN and DME equipment are used as part of RNAV equipment,
the navigation field in Europe will be ensured and the best choice of RSBN and DME
beacons will be provided in areas where their operational areas are overlapped.
3.2.3 ATN Networking
The enhancement of ATM automation, envisaged by the CNS/ATM concept, is based

on the Aeronautical Telecommunication Network (ATN) infrastructure developed
by ICAO. It is an information network that allows the interaction of the ground
data transmission subnetwork, the air-to-ground data subnetwork and the airborne
equipment data transfer subnetwork based on the adoption of common modes and
interface protocols based on the OSI model [14].
ATN is designed to provide the following types of services to different groups of
users:
• Air Traffic Services (ATS);

• Aeronautical Operational Control (AOC);
• Aeronautical Administrative Communications—AAC);
• Aeronautical Passenger Communications (APC).
ATS airspace maintenance includes:
• flight information services (FIS), the purpose of which is to provide advice and
information to ensure the safe and efficient operation of flights;
• emergency notification;
• advisory services;
• airspace control service.
AOC is a communication necessary for exercising authority with respect to the

commencement, continuation, modification or termination of an aircraft flight, based
on the interests of safety, regularity and efficiency of flights. AAC is a communication
used by aviation operational enterprises for solving service issues of flight support and
transport services. The ARS is a non-safety communication and provides personal
data and voice data transmission to passengers and crew members.
Prior to the implementation of ATN, a number of ATS functions performed and
continue to be performed by ICAO standardized voice communication systems of
the HF and VHF bands, which are now part of the international aeronautical mobile
service.
The implementation of the CNS/ATM concept takes place at the state level, inter-
national and regional organizations, avionics manufacturers and operators of aviation
equipment. One of the important aspects of this process is the development of new
airborne equipment.
The development of integrated avionics for civil and military aviation should fully
take into account the standards introduced by ICAO for CNS/ATM so that integrated
equipment can become an essential part of a future international system. This should
take into account the real state and prospects of some existing and future radio
navigation systems. To this end, a brief overview of the current state and features
of systems whose functional tasks, in our opinion, should be solved by integrated
avionics is presented below.
3.2.4 Satellite Radio Navigation Systems
The core of the CNS/ATM concept and systems is the global navigation satellite
system GNSS, standardized by ICAO and designed to become a worldwide loca-
tion and time determination system. Currently, GNSS operation is provided by
GPS and GLONASS. After creating GALILEO, GNSS will be able to work on
the constellations of three SRNS.
ICAO, in its documents, detailed the requirements for GNSS performance,
including accuracy, integrity, service continuity and operational readiness. To
improve these characteristics, standards have been developed for GNSS functional
augmentation systems, which are divided into three categories: aviation (ABAS),
terrestrial (GBAS and GRAS) and satellite (SBAS).
Functional augmentation aviation systems must provide autonomous integrity
monitoring (AAIM) of airborne consumer avionics navigation equipment or
autonomous integrity monitoring on board aircraft using alternative navigation aids.
Ground-based augmentation systems (GBAS) provide increased accuracy of
aircraft positioning and integrity by implementing a GNSS differential mode. The
GBAS is designed to serve aircraft in the aerodrome area. It includes a local control
and correction station and a transmission line of corrective amendments operating
in the VHF band in the broadcast mode (VDB). The GBAS coverage area is limited
to 37 km from station; therefore, this system belongs to local systems of functional
addition.
The ground-based regional augmentation system (GRAS) was standardized by
ICAO in 2005 (Amendment 80 to Volume 1 of Annex 10 to the ICAO Convention
with a date of applicability of November 25, 2005). GRAS is designed to support
GNSS operations on all phases of flight, including the route, navigation aerodrome
zone (including landing approaches along a curved-linear trajectory to the final point
of the approach phase) and instrument landing with vertical operations guidance
(APV). GRAS will be able to support surface navigation systems (A-SMGS).
GRAS should consist of a number of ground facilities—reference stations, a
leading station and VDB transmitters, connected by communication lines into a
network structure. GRAS is designed to provide advanced services within the VDB
transmitters’ working areas (up to 200 miles). When using multiple VDB transmit-
ters, the GRAS coverage area can be enlarged, so this system can be assigned to
wide-ranging add-on systems.
The satellite-based augmentation system (SBAS) is also designed to provide
consumers with information on integrity, additional ranging signals and correc-
tive information at all stages of the flight, including APV and accurate landing
approaches. SBAS consists of three subsystems—ground infrastructure, SBAS satel-
lites and SBAS airborne receivers. The ground infrastructure includes a network of
tracking and information processing stations that receive ranging data from main
GNSS satellites and SBAS geostationary satellites, calculate GNSS integrity indi-
cators and corrections, and transmit this information to SBAS satellites. The latter
relay information from the ground infrastructure to SBAS airborne receivers, which
determine the navigation parameters of the aircraft on GNSS and SBAS satellites,
taking into account the information of the ground infrastructure. By coverage of the
service area, SBAS refers to a wide-area system.
According to the principle of operation of the functional supplement system,
GBAS, GRAS and SBAS can be classified as differential, since they use the GNSS
differential mode of operation.
At present, all the above-mentioned functional augmentation systems are being
put into operation. AAIM and RAIM algorithms are implemented in GNSS airborne
receivers. In the USA, local ground-based augmentation systems called LAAS are
operated.
According to the decision of the federal administration in the USA, the satellite
wide-area addition system (WAAS) has been created. The development was included
in the US Federal Navigation Plan 2000. As of early 2003, WAAS included 25 control
stations designed to monitor and supervise the navigation field; two main control
stations for processing monitoring data; six ground data transfer stations to the space
segment; distribution network information exchange. The WAAS system contains 48
control stations, six main stations, 16 data transmission stations and 8 geostationary
satellites.
The WAAS working area is the space above the ground surface up to 30 km above
sea level, limited in terms of the area of North America (to the Gulf of Mexico) and
partly of the North Atlantic.
At the initiative of the states of the European Community, the satellite system of
the functional complement EGNOS is developed. The goals of its creation are:
addition of the used GPS and GLONASS navigation satellites due to the three
geostationary EGNOS satellites;
relaying the EGNOS satellites on board the aircraft of the correction informa-
tion generated by the ground infrastructure of EGNOS, which allows to improve
the performance characteristics to meet the requirements of an accurate landing
approach in category I.
The EGNOS ground infrastructure includes 40 reference stations located
throughout the service area; four main control centers located in the UK, Germany,
Spain and Italy; six ground navigation stations located in the UK, Germany, Spain,
Italy, Portugal and France; service area—the eastern part of the Atlantic, Europe
(including the European and part of the Asian zone of Russia), the Mediterranean,
the North Sea. The development of EGNOS is based on its integration and unification
with WAAS and MSAS (Japan).
The wide-area addition system MSAS, similar to WAAS and EGNOS, includes
four monitoring stations located in Japan; two monitoring and ranging stations
located in Australia and Hawaii; two control stations located in Japan; network
communication system. The service area is the North Pacific between Asia and
America, Japan, East and Southeast Asia, the northern part of Australia, and a large
part of the Asian zone of Russia.
GNSS airborne aviation equipment is a widely recognized and promising means of
providing global navigation. Since 2003, certification of aircraft of the Russian Feder-
ation in the absence of GNSS consumer equipment on them has not been performed
[15]. Therefore, it should be included in the integrated avionics. At the same time,
GNSS has a number of drawbacks. These include, in particular, the weakening or
complete shading of signal sources during aircraft evolution, the interference of the
components of the radio navigation signal at the receiving point. For aviation, the
consequences of the loss of a GNSS signal even for a short time can be catastrophic
[13]. The study of the properties of GPS receivers under the action of interference
showed that civilian GPS receivers are not suitable for military use [16].
The euphoria of the first years of satellite technology development, when GPS was
declared by the United States and ICAO as the only means of navigation, has passed.
Already since 1998, US experts recognize that alternative backup RNS (VOR/DME,
LORAN-C, marine radio stations) must be maintained to ensure continuous radio
navigation throughout all phases of flight. This approach is also reflected in the ICAO
RNP documents. It is noted that the air fleet of many countries is quickly equipped
with FMS systems that control the flight along the RNAV trajectories according to
the signals of many (up to 12 simultaneously) DME radio beacons with an accuracy
almost equal to the GPS accuracy [13].
To eliminate a number of GPS deficiencies and maintain leadership in the field
of satellite navigation in the USA, large-scale work has been carried out to develop
and improve satellite navigation technologies.
Innovations make it possible to reduce location errors in the nominal (autonomous)
mode of GPS use by civilian consumers to a level of 5 m. Using new frequencies
can significantly improve the reliability of navigation definitions, their insensitivity
to unforeseen disturbances and interference, ensure redundancy in navigation signal.
ICAO has adopted the GNSS Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPS),
including the ground-based subsystem of the GBAS functional supplement, which
includes a VHF Data Link (VDB), which provides transmission of corrective infor-
mation for the implementation of the landing approach GNSS. The introduction of
an integrated avionics with GNSS consumer equipment and a VDB receiver ensures
the implementation of the GNSS approach mode.
The disadvantage of GBAS is the need for significant organizational and planning
measures related to the placement and allocation of frequencies of VDB transmitters
together with VOR and ILS radio beacons.
ICAO documents do not prohibit the creation of other international and national
GNSS augmentation systems, including using other data transmission lines. Exam-
ples of such overseas operated systems are Starfix systems from Fugro, Sky Fix from
Racal, Eurofix. However, to use the information of these systems, aircraft must be
equipped with Inmarsat or Loran-C/Chaika receivers, which receive messages in the
RTCM-104 format, and corresponding GNSS receivers, which is contrary to ICAO
standards.
GNSS information can be integrated with information from local SHORAN. This
navigation systems and GNSS complement each other to a certain extent. In peace-
time, GNSS provides globalization and greater continuity of navigation definitions
than near navigation systems. In wartime, due to the lower resistance to organized
jamming, GNSS will lose these qualities. In addition, the aeronautical satellites of
this system can be easily destroyed. Local SHORAN, especially RSBN, have a
significant noise immunity, and due to the dispersal of radio beacons—and greater
survivability.
At the 11th ICAO Conference, it was agreed that “the deployment of GNSS will be
phased in, providing for the gradual implementation of system improvements. In the
near future, GNSS applications are aimed at ensuring the possibility of the quickest
introduction of satellite zonal navigation based on basic satellite constellations and
airborne integrated multi-sensor equipment [17].
A GNSS approval may facilitate the decommissioning of specific conventional
terrestrial radio navigation aids. However, this should be done, given the degree
of reduction in GNSS vulnerability (the danger of deliberate damage or electronic

suppression, resulting in interruptions in the provision of GNSS services).
The conference pointed out that “at present, three main methods are used to reduce
the impact of these interruptions on flight operations:
(a) the use of inertial navigation systems and related solutions in GNSS receivers;
(b) the use of special procedures for the pilot and air traffic control;
(c) the use of ground-based radio navigation aids, used as a reserve with GNSS or
in conjunction with it” [17].
The last of these methods is recognized by the 11th Conference as one of the most
effective means of minimizing the impact on aircraft of service interruptions provided
by GNSS. In particular, the conference recognized that in the European region for the
period 2010–2015, it is likely that service continuity should be ensured by retaining
the existing VOR infrastructure to support reverse navigation (return to navigation
through VOR if GNSS information is lost).
From our point of view, the existing RSBN infrastructure can provide support
for reverse navigation in the airspace of Russia and should strive not for decommis-
sioning RSBN beacons, but for their repair, life extension and modernization.
GNSS should be introduced gradually as its capabilities improve. During the transition
period, the ground infrastructure of existing navigation systems should be preserved … It
is expected that in the foreseeable future multi-sensor systems will be used, using GNSS as
one of the sensitive elements. Such navigation systems have more reliable characteristics in
comparison with individual sensors or autonomous systems. An aircraft using multi-sensor
navigation systems … can provide a higher service readiness that cannot be obtained using
only GPS or GLONASS. [17]
Thus, the conclusions of the 11th Conference of the ICAO confirm the relevance
of the development of a multifunctional integrated avionics of navigation, landing,
data exchange and ATC.
3.2.5 Short-Range Radio Navigation
Currently, there are three systems SHORAN in the world—the international

VOR/DME system, the Russian national system RSBN and the associated landing
system PRMG, as well as the US and NATO military systems TACAN [18]. Azimuth
radio beacons VOR operate in the meter range, the rest of the system—in the
decimeter wavelength range (UHF).
Only in the USA, there are at least 1000 VOR/DME and VORTAC radio beacons.
They provide almost all the significant airports in the USA. The main aircraft are
100% equipped with VOR/DME/ILS equipment [13]. The VOR/DME system, at
least its long-range DME channel, will be operated at least until 2020 and then
replaced with GPS [19].
Along with GPS, the TACAN system remains a means of tactical air navigation of
NATO military aircraft of the LA countries over land and sea. The territorial combi-
nation of TACAN and VOR radio beacons allows aircraft using military equipment
to perform flights in the airspace designated for civilian aircraft. Currently, several
hundred TACAN beacons are in operation or in reserve.
Radio systems VOR, DME, TACAN along with GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO
and landing systems ILS, MLS/PDME and precision approach radar are accepted as
standard for NATO operations [20].
The Russian system RSBN is the main means of close navigation of all types of
military aircraft in the airspace of Russia; it is used by military aircraft of a number
of foreign countries (India, Vietnam, Algeria, Egypt, North Korea, etc.). To date,
about 200 RSBN radio beacons and at least 3000 sets of airborne equipment are in
operation. RSBN radio beacons installed on highways, at airports, on airfields of
military aviation and on aircraft carriers provide a navigation field over the territory
of the Russia.
The Russian system RSBN was developed and put into operation in the USSR in
1958. It exceeds the VOR, DME and TACAN systems in the accuracy of determining
the coordinates and also has a number of additional functions that are absent in
these foreign systems. The RSBN implemented the landing mode of aircraft using a
single airborne navigation and landing equipment, which operates both with land and
ship radio beacons, and with special small-sized course-glideslop landing beacons
(PRMG). In the process of development in RSBN, a directional mode was realized,
which significantly increased the energy potential of the radio link, noise immunity
and electromagnetic compatibili ty with other radio engineering means; from 40 to
176, the number of working frequency-code channels has been increased.
In RSBN implemented also:
• duplex digital data link (DDL);
• the principle of secondary radiolocation, which ensures the observation and iden-
tification of marks from the aircraft on the indicator of the circular view of the
radio beacon or command and control center;
• the mode of collecting and meeting aircraft in the air for refueling.
At the World Radiocommunication Conference of WRC-97 (Geneva, 1997),
RSBN obtained a legal right to operate in the existing frequency range on a primary
basis until the end of the depreciation period of ground-based beacons and currently
approved to transfer RSBN in the international radio navigation frequency range.
The integration of navigation functions in any one of the three near navigation
systems in one airborne equipment allows for navigation of the Russian Armed
Forces during flights in almost all regions of Europe, Asia, Africa and America.
3.2.6 Digital Data Transmission Line at RSBN Frequencies
The RSBN implemented a duplex digital data transmission line of the decimeter range
of radio waves (UHF DDL) “beacon-airborne,” “airborne-beacon” and “airborne-
airborne.” It uses the same ground and airborne receivers and transmitters as for
navigation and landing. UHF DDL can provide the following tasks:
• flight control from a control tower;
• transmission of flight information from the aircraft (i.e., actually automatic
dependent surveillance);
• information exchange between aircraft during group gathering and group actions.
On the basis of the UHF DDL on the RSBN frequencies, a domestic local system
of functional addition (LSFA) can be created, which can be used, in particular, to
implement the approach and landing of aircraft and helicopters.
In principle, LSFA should consist of the following main parts:
• ground local control and correction station, installed and geodesically attached to
RSBN radio beacons;
• ground-based data transmission equipment, consisting of a transmitter and a
digital unit, which are installed on the RSBN radio beacon;
• an airborne DDL receiver and a digital module that provides the calculation of
landing data using GNSS information and correction data.
In accordance with the GNSS SARPS, the GBAS ground-based functional
complement should form and transmit four types of messages to the aircraft. The
maximum message frequencies are listed in Table 3.3.
The calculation shows that in order to transmit the measurement results on 16
satellites with the maximum number of FAS blocks equal to 4, it is necessary, on
average, to transmit data on the DDL for about 1 s, containing about 4000 bits, which
is significantly less than the possible number of bits which can be passed on DDL.
DDL signals can be received and processed airborne an aircraft in an integrated
avionics system in the same way as the existing “beacon-to-board” information trans-
mission mode with messages issued to the computer of the integrated avionics for
calculating the landing data.
When installing DDL at aerodromes, where the ILS or PRMG radio beacons are
operated simultaneously with the RSBN beacon, the synthesized landing trajectory
Table 3.3 The

Message type Maximum radio frequency
maximum GBAS message
frequencies 1 One message in 0.5 s
2 One message in 2.5 s
4 All FAS blocks (final approach section) in 2.5 s
5 Data on all involved range finding sources for
2.5 s
calculated in the airborne equipment can be combined with the ILS landing line
(PRMG). Integrated avionics can simultaneously receive signals from GNSS, DDL,
ILS (PRMG) and carry out joint data processing of these systems. In this case, a
significant improvement in accuracy is expected due to GNSS and DDL and reliability
(integrity) of landing due to ILS (PRMG).
When installing DDL at aerodromes that are not equipped with ILS (PRMG), the
approach and landing is carried out according to GLS (GNSS and DDL data).
3.2.7 Flight Management Computer System
On many modern aircraft of Russia, airborne RSBN/PRMG equipment is associated

with autonomous means of navigation—INS, ADS, RA, BA, heading system (HS),
etc. On this basis, in the flight management computer (FMC), various variants of the
main and/or backup contours of navigation on the route, automatic or semi-automatic
drive to the area of the aerodrome and landing approach are implemented.
An introduction of computer to the integrated avionics, which receives information
from the associated aircraft systems, gives this complex the FMCS function, which
would become the computing core of the integrated avionics.
The integrated avionics computer can work both in the backup and in the main
control loop of the aircraft. It should provide the following basic functions for this
flight:
(1) Preflight training:
• automated preflight monitoring of the operational capability of integrated
avionics, identification of faulty modules and verification of the reliability
of information received from external systems;
• automatic input from the loader of the navigation database;
• automated flight plan selection from the airborne navigation database;
• manual (when interacting with the control panel) entry of initial operational
data, including changes in the flight program;
• automatic output of the values of frequency and frequency-code channels
in the radio navigation equipment included in the integrated avionics;
• initial exhibition of inertial systems;
• calculation of take-off data.
(2) Take-off:
• director control of the longitudinal and lateral movement of the aircraft after
separation from the ground;
• detection of the area of dangerous changes in the speed and direction of
the wind and hit of the aircraft in this area, issuing an alarm system about
entering the dangerous area.
(3) Climbing, en route and descent:
• automatic piloting in horizontal and vertical planes;

• continuous automatic determination and issuance of the current values of
flight and navigation parameters;
• automatic and manual (when interacting with the control panel) correction
of numerous coordinates with complex processing of information of radio
navigation aids of integrated avionics and external autonomous and non-
autonomous means;
• automatic stabilization of barometric altitude;
• detection of dangerous hydro-meteorological formations;
• automatic exit to a given level;
• automatic exit to a given vertical speed and angle of inclination of the
trajectory and their stabilization;
• automatic exit to a given instrument speed and its stabilization;
• calculation of arrival time at intermediate and control points of the route to
the landing airfield;
• determination of the flight time and distance to the flight point selected by
the crew, the aerodrome or any programmed point when flying along the
programmed trajectory or the shortest distance;
• determining the time of flight of the programmed points;
• automatic maneuvering in the waiting area;
• generation of signals for monitoring and display during flight control;
• detection and identification of a dangerous approach to the earth’s surface
and early warning of the crew with the formation of a synthesized image of
the underlying surface and a safe care trajectory.
(4) Prelanding maneuvering, approach, landing, go-around:

• formation of parameters for premaneuvering according to the data of radio
navigation and landing aids of integrated avionics;
• automatic predeparture maneuvering in the arrivals aerodrome area;
• formation of control commands for an automatic approach in the ILS, MLS,
GLS modes of integrated avionics;
• providing an executive approach in the ILS, MLS, GLS modes of integrated
avionics;
• automatic control of the instrument speed;
• formation and issuance of an alarm about maximum deviations from the
calculated descent path in the horizontal and vertical planes with automatic
and director for landing;
• detection of the area of dangerous changes in wind speed and direction;
• automatic go-around by crew command;
• automatic and manual transition to the mode of entry;
• detection and identification of a dangerous approach to the earth’s surface
and early warning of the crew with the formation of a synthesized image of
the underlying surface and a safe care trajectory;
• formation and issuance of speech and visual alarms, warning of a dangerous

approach to the earth’s surface.
At all stages of the FMCS, which is part of the integrated avionics, must provide:
• formation and display of flight and navigation information to the crew and
commands for manual control in self-summer and control over movement
parameters with automatic control over a given trajectory;
• output to the indicators of electronic maps;
• warning the crew of the dangerous approach of the aircraft;
• implementation of the functions of ADS-C, ADS-B with the help of the DDL
channels of the integrated avionics;
• formation, indication and delivery of current UTC time to consumers;
• determination and indication to ground personnel and crew at all stages of tech-
nical maintenance of information on the technical condition of integrated avionics
and associated airborne equipment systems.
To implement the concept of CNS/ATM on new-generation airplanes, the ARINC
702A feature “Advanced flight management computer system” has been released
[21]. Figure 3.1 shows the connection of a single FMC in accordance with ARINC
702A.
3.2.8 Ground Proximity Warning System
The functional tasks of detecting and identifying dangerous approach of the aircraft
to the earth’s surface, crew’s early warning of approaching, generating and issuing
speech and visual signals given in the preceding paragraph are currently solved by a
separate system (computer) ground proximity warnings (EGPWS or TAWS).
According to aviation statistics, collisions of an aircraft with the ground or with
an artificial obstacle during a controlled flight are one of the dominant factors leading
to aviation accidents. This problem is particularly acute in mountainous areas and
near the airports equipped with imperfect means of air traffic control. In accordance
with ICAO terminology, such aviation accidents are called “controlled flight in-to-
terrain” (CFIT), which means “collision with a land in a controlled flight.” The
unusual situation is that there is a collision with the ground of serviceable aircraft,
managed by qualified and efficient crews. Prior to 1975, an average of eight aircraft
attack operations occurred in the global Air Force fleet of commercial jets associated
with CFIT. When in the mid-70s, the ground proximity warning system (GPWS)
was installed for the first time on an airplane, the number of aviation accidents was
impressively reduced. Over the past 30 years, international organizations (ICAO,
EUROCONTROL, and others), dealing with flight safety issues, have done a lot of
work on the prevention of accidents related to CFIT:
128
First pilot Navigator

indicators EFI EFI indicator
(EFI) controller controller (EFI)
#1 #2
Flight control Flight control
computer #1 computer #2
(FCC) (FCC)
to the GNSS to the GNSS
Flight
Simulator Flight data MCDU #1 FMC MCDU #2
recorder controller
Propulsion Data
controller. Data can flow directly to FMC)

Data Loader
Flight management computer (FMC)
Chronometer Fuel gauge
ACARS/ ACAS/ Ethernet

CMU ADS-B
GNSS IRS ADS ILS/ DME VOR IRS #3 VOR DME ADC IRS #2 GNSS
MMR ТСС, ЕЕС
#1* #1 #1 #1 #1 #2 #2 #2 #2*
#1
Fig. 3.1 Single FMC communication according to ARINC 702A-1 (* MCDU can be a GNSS
3 Functional Tasks of Integrated Airborne Avionics
• Almost all aircrafts are equipped with ground approach speed alarm systems,
earth surface approach warning systems (GPWS).
• Strict control was introduced to prevent the excess of the vertical speed of descent
of the aircraft to exceed 10 m/s and the inadmissibility of maneuvering near the
ground (in the absence of reliable information about the aircraft’s location).
However, in spite of all the technical innovations and organizational measures
introduced in recent years, the number of CFIT class aviation accidents remained
high (one aviation accident per thousand aircraft per year).
For a phased solution of this problem, the World Flight Safety Foundation (FSF)
and ICAO have developed a whole range of measures, among which one of the main
ones is the mandatory introduction of advanced land proximity warning systems
(TAWS) with the function of assessing the terrain in flight direction. These systems
have a built-in digital database of the terrain, which makes it possible to carry out
an early warning function of the presence of danger in the flight direction. The work
of these systems is based on a constant comparison of the predicted trajectory of the
aircraft with the terrain digital database stored in the memory of the system and the
artificial obstacles.
The Ground Proximity Early Warning System (EGPWS) is related to additional
aircraft equipment and is a means of improving flight safety, providing with the help
of audible and visual signals a warning to crew members about the occurrence of
such flight conditions that could lead to a collision of aircraft with the earth or water
surface.
In the EGPWS, all the necessary functions of generating warning signals to the
crew are implemented in accordance with [22, 23]:
(1) The warning function of the expected collision with the underlying surface:
Mode 1: “Excessive rate of decline.”

Mode 2: “Excessive speed of approach to the earth’s surface” (hilly or
mountainous terrain or ground structures).
Mode 3: “Excessive rate of decline or excessive loss of height after take-off
or during a go-around.”
Mode 4: “Insufficient headroom over the terrain when flying in a configu-
ration that does not correspond to the landing.”
Mode 5: “Excessive reduction of the aircraft below the glide path during an
instrument landing approach.”
Mode 6: “Exceeding the threshold value of the difference between the
geometrical and relative barometric altitude” when landing on aerodromes
using a barometric altitude system relative to atmospheric pressure at the
level of aerodrome (QFE).
(2) Earth proximity early warning function (EPEW) (mode 7).

To realize this function, the EGPWS “surveys” ahead of the aircraft in the flight
direction along and below the horizontal and vertical flight path of the aircraft
and provides the necessary signaling in case the elements of the underlying
surface fall into the working protective space. The EPEW function is active
throughout all phases of flight, including the evolution of the aircraft. The
working protection space consists of the calculated range in the direction of
flight of the aircraft, the distance on either side of the flight trajectory and a
certain distance down depending on the flight mode and current parameters of
the aircraft movement. The working protection space varies depending on the
flight stage and the distance to the runway. The size of the working protective
space in the horizontal plane increases when the aircraft turns. The working
protection space is constructed taking into account the accuracy of navigation
sensors.
(3) The warning function of premature reduction (WPR) during landing (mode 8).
In order to implement this function, the EGPWS uses information about the current
location of the aircraft and the airport database to determine whether the aircraft is
dangerously below the normal approach path for the nearest runway.
The WPR function provides all types of instrumental setup, including landing
approach with straight and standard turn-over. Mode 8 is active at all stages of flight,
except for the stage of take-off (go-around), in the altitude range from 10 to 235 m.
The height at which alarms are prohibited in mode 8 when the aircraft is lowered is
10 m.
In contrast to the well-known algorithms of the TAWS systems, Russian EGPWS
[24], after calculating the predicted trajectory, a protective space (PS) is formed and
compared with the relief, and the profile and frontal projections of the relief are
synthesized by selecting the maximum height of the relief in limits of information
scanning of elements of a relief in the longitudinal and transverse directions with
respect to the flight direction of the aircraft, adapt the PS to the current dynamic
state of the aircraft, determine the planned, profile and frontal projections of the
PS, protect the mentioned projections of the protective space of the aircraft with the
same projections of the relief, form the video image of the combined plan, profile
and frontal projections of the relief and the aircraft’s salary and warn the pilot about
possible danger by video of the contact of the profile surface of the protective space of
the aircraft with the profile projection the relief and the selection on the video image
of the mentioned combined projections of the elements of the dangerous relief inside
the PS. In addition, in the EGPWS inside the aircraft PS, an emergency signaling
area is formed, similar in geometry to the aircraft PS and limited by the minimum
allowable flight times to dangerous relief.
The EGPWS uses a specially designed electronic relief database, officially regis-
tered with Rospatent of Russia [25] and certified in the System of Certification of
Geodesic, Topographic and Cartographic Products of Roskartografiya [26].
The forecast of the altitude of the aircraft, relative to which the height of the
underlying surface is displayed on the airborne indicator, is produced for 15 s of
the flight of the aircraft (taking into account the current values of ground speed and
height of the aircraft). The length of the plot of the underlying surface in the direction
of the aircraft, displayed on the airborne indicator of the EGPWS, is determined by
the selected scale (in the range of 10, 20, 40, 80, 160, 320, 640 km).
The warning signals are generated by the EGPWS at values of the current flight
altitude below the established minimum allowable values or when deviating down-
ward from the equisignal zone of the radiotechnical glide path (RGP) exceeding the
established maximum allowable values. Early warning signals are generated when
the aircraft approaches the terrain sections or artificial obstacles that present a poten-
tial danger of collision with them. Alerts continue to emit continuously until the
cause of the alert is resolved.
Minimum allowable values of flight altitude, maximum allowable deviations down
from the RGP and allowable distances to potentially dangerous areas of the earth’s
surface for various stages and conditions of flight are set on the basis of ensuring
timely warning of the crew about the potential for a large collision with the ground
a possible range of situations. At the same time, the minimum number of pseudo-
positive system operations under normal flight conditions is ensured, when the crew
correctly performs the take-off and landing procedures and common piloting practice.
The minimum permissible flight parameters are automatically calculated during
the flight based on the current information of the GNSS airborne transducer, radio
altimeter, barometric altitude sensor, airspeed sensor (or number M), airborne
equipment of the landing system, and also depending on the chassis and flaps.
The high performance growth of computing facilities allows developers to
carry out almost continuous upgrading of the EGPWS, increasing its capabilities:
improving the algorithms for generating the PS, synthesizing and displaying the
optimal trajectories recommended for the pilot to perform the maneuver, imple-
menting 3D technologies the formation of the video image of the covering surface
and artificial obstacles.
In parallel with the modification of the main function of the EGPWS (assessment
of the terrain in the direction of flight), work is being carried out in the direction of
integration with other airborne systems that are involved in the prevention of critical
situations on board.
3.2.9 Instrumental Approach and Landing Systems
3.2.9.1 International Approach and Landing Systems
The internationally operated ILS internationally operated system does not fully meet
the requirements of aviation. Therefore, in the 1980s, ICAO adopted yet another
landing system as an international one—MLS. However, the latter has spread mainly
in European countries. In 1993, the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has
abandoned the MLS system in the hope of rapidly adopting satellite landing tech-
nologies [27, 28]. The FAA’s decision was not welcomed by European civil aviation
organizations and airlines because there was no substantiated evidence that GPS
could provide the necessary safety standards for landing aircraft in categories II
and III, while the MLS tests showed its compliance with the required requirements
[29, 30].
Under these conditions, in 1995, ICAO adopted for a long time (at least until
2015) a strategy for introducing and using non-visual means for landing and landing
aircraft [17, 31]. The evolution of the new technology required a flexible approach
to the concept of all-weather flight in order to maximize the benefits of technical
development. To create such flexibility, the strategy allows, by defining its goals and
initial principles, to integrate new technical developments or ideas into it.
The strategy does not imply a transition to a single global system or the choice
of approach and landing support systems. This strategy is designed to provide certi-
fication of future systems or system configurations for international use in addition
to the existing standard non-visual tools.
As a starting point, the following considerations are given:
• The concept of RNP as applied to the approach, landing and departure stages will
simplify the use of the newly created technical means.
• ILS system has limitations on the number of channels and noise immunity; many
obsolete radio beacons need replacing; however, in most parts of the world, there
is the possibility of continuing to operate ILS for the foreseeable future.
• MLS category I system was put into operation; category II ground equipment is
certified; category III ground equipment is available.
• Demonstrations of GNSS capabilities with a functional addition to ensure landing
approaches and landings were conducted; however, integrity, continuity and
preparedness must be addressed, as well as technical, operational and organi-
zational problems. In this regard, it is assumed that between 2000 and 2005,
internationally accepted GNSS may appear with the necessary functional addi-
tion to support Category I flights, and it is not expected that such a system may
appear to support flights categories II and III before 2005–2015.
• It is considered that only the main systems (ILS, MLS and GNSS with the
necessary functional addition) will play the main role in providing all-weather
flights.
ICAO believes that a flexible approach to landing systems can be provided by
avionics, known as the MMR multimode landing receiver. To ensure maximum flex-
ibility, it is envisaged that the landing-critical functions of such a receiver will be
provided in a single unit, and VDB messages will be received in the MMR. Equally,
the multimode capabilities of other airborne equipment can be used [31].
Considering the experience of developing airborne equipment within the frame-
work of the CNS/ATM concept, the 11th ICAO Air Navigation Conference [17]
has moved from recommending the introduction of a multi-mode landing receiver
to recommending introducing multi-mode airborne equipment that was previously
reflected in ARINC 756 and ARINC 660A. In our opinion, this possibility is the
implementation of MMR functions with a VDB receiver in integrated avionics of
navigation, landing, data exchange and air traffic control.
With the amendment adopted by the 11th Conference, ICAO’s global strategy
for standard non-visual means of ensuring accurate approaches and landings is as
follows:
“(a) continue to use ILS to ensure the highest level of service as long as it is
operational and economically viable, while making every effort to keep the airport
open to aircraft equipped with ILS equipment;
(b) implement MLS, where it is necessary from an operational and profitable from
an economic point of view, while making every effort to ensure that the airport
remains open to aircraft equipped with ILS equipment;
(c) implement GNSS with the necessary functional additions to provide APV and
Category I flights, where it is necessary from an operational and economically
advantageous point of view;
(d) facilitate and create, and use of landing assurance capabilities with the help
of multi-mode airborne equipment;
(e) promote the use of APV operations, in particular GNSS-based vertical
guidance, in order to improve safety and regularity of flights;
(f) identify and resolve operational and technical issues related to the ability to use
GNSS in conjunction with the GBAS to support the implementation of categories
II and III. Implement GNSS to support operations in categories II and III, where
it is necessary from an operational and economically advantageous point of view;
(g) ensure that each region can develop a strategy for implementing these systems
in accordance with the global strategy” [17].
The strategy envisages the use of non-visual means of approach for landing and
landing with vertical guidance (APV), as well as a precise approach for landing
and landing. “It is assumed that the operation of GNSS with GBAS to ensure accu-
rate Category I approaches will begin in 2006.” It is expected that internationally
accepted GNSS with the necessary functional addition may appear to support flights
in categories II and III no earlier than 2010–2015” [17].
ICAO discusses the proposal of the WP/17 working group on the establish-
ment of a new, longer compared to the existing, period of protection (work without
replacement) for VOR, DME, ILS, MLS systems—December 31, 2015 [32].
3.2.9.2 Approach for Landing and Landing System for Airplanes

of the Decimeter Range Prmg
The system of instrumental landing of airplanes of the decimeter range PRMG is

used to form airborne the signals of deviations from a given landing course and a
given planning glide and also provides information about the current distance of the
aircraft to the landing point.
The landing system consists of course and glide radio beacons PRMG-4 (PRMG-
5, PRMG-76), a ranging measuring channel retransmitter and airborne equipment.
The glide beacon and the retransmitter operate on a single carrier frequency of the
ranging channel RSBN. The course beacon operates at the frequency of the azimuth
channel RSBN.
The response ranging signals of the retransmitter of the ranging channel of

the landing system are similar to those of the RSBN radio beacon operating in
omnidirectional mode.
PRMG system provides the necessary integrity and availability of information
for categorized approach (especially in adverse weather conditions) for I and II
categories of meteorological minimum (60 × 800 and 30 × 400 m).
Airborne equipment RSBN was originally developed as a multifunctional equip-
ment for navigation and landing, and quite naturally, this tradition should be reflected
in the advanced integrated airborne equipment.
3.2.10 Interaircraft Navigation
To ensure the group actions of the aircraft in the integrated avionics, the mutual coor-
dinate determination (MCD) mode must be implemented, allowing you to measure
the mutual coordinates (slant range and true bearing) on each aircraft of the group
and transfer them to other aircraft.
On the frequency channels, RSBN implemented the mode of collecting aircraft
in the group and aircraft rendezvous in the air for refueling (mode “Rendezvous”).
Its inclusion in the integrated avionics will allow you to turn away from installation
on promising aircraft of obsolete airborne equipment, which has the worst weight
and size characteristics and reliability.
3.2.11 ATN Digital Data Lines
The ATN subnetwork architecture is based on the basic OSI open system intercon-
nection model. The model has seven protocol layers (Table 3.4) [14]. All seven levels
have a place in the model of the subscriber system (station), i.e., system, the main
task of which is the implementation of application processes for the user’s needs. In
the ATN network, the subscriber system is a ground-based or airborne system using
data transmitted over the ATN.
The connection into a single part of the information network is carried out by an
associative system of one of the four types: switch, bridge, router and gateway. The
switch connects the channels at the physical level, the bridge at the physical (1st) and
link (2nd) levels, the router at the 1st, 2nd and 3rd levels, the gateway at all seven
levels.
In accordance with currently accepted standards, the ATN network contains the
following subnets:
SSR discrete-address system of mode S;
VHF digital communication lines (very-high-frequency data link—VDL); another
name—VHF data transmission lines (VHF DL);
Table 3.4 The ATN subnetwork architecture

Level Functions
7 (applied) Application process interface
6 (data views) Coordination of the presentation of information (alphanumeric, graphic, etc.)
and data generation (encryption, compression, code conversion)
5 (session) Supporting the dialog of applied processes, the implementation of the
connection and disconnection of these processes; implementation of data
exchange between applications processes. The level provides interaction
control, determines the beginning and end of tasks, time, duration and mode of
dialog (bidirectional simultaneous or sequential data exchange), restoration of
communication without data loss
4 (transport) Providing end-to-end information exchange between systems (breaking
messages into packets and combining packets into messages; analysis of the
reliability of the received message as a whole; addressing of physical devices
on the network, etc.)
3 (network) Exchange of information packets (message packing; packet routing; priority of
packet transmission; organization of multiple access; error detection during
packet transmission)
2 (channel) Data channel control, i.e., a combination of hardware and physical environment
that directly connects the system; packet encoding and decoding
1 (physical) Providing a physical interface with a communication channel (modulation and
demodulation of signals, anti-interference)
HF digital communication line (high-frequency data link—HFDL);

Aeronautical mobile-satellite services (AMSS); other names are SATCOM or
Satellite Communication Data Link (SCDL).
When developing integrated avionics of navigation, landing, data exchange and
air traffic control, it is advisable to consider the implementation of data exchange
equipment in its structure in S mode and on VDL, which is necessary to provide
automatic dependent surveillance.
3.2.11.1 VHF Data Lines
The ATN architecture provides a single service network interface for users and has
the ability to “transparently” transfer user information across any subnet. Together,
all VDL subnets form an aeronautical mobile (route) service (Aeronautical Mobil
(Route) Services—AM (R) S), for which a frequency range of 118.0–137.0 MHz
with 25 kHz channel spacing and vertical polarization is defined.
So far, ICAO has adopted the “Standards and Recommended Practices” (SARPS)
for VHF DATALINK modes 2, 3 and 4 [33]; RTCA has developed MASPS for VDL
modes 2 and 3 [34].
The following levels are defined for the VDL subnet in ICAO documents:
• physical level—is responsible only for the transmission of binary information

within the physical environment (setting the frequency of the receiver and trans-
mitter of the VHF radio, receiving digital data by the receiver, transmitting digital
data by the transmitter);
• link layer—provides reliable information transfer within the physical environ-
ment. This level is divided from bottom to top by the Media Access Control
(MAC) sublayer, which defines the data path and controls the bit stream on this
path, the Special Services Sublayer (VSS) is only for VHF Mode 4, and the Data
Line Services (DLS) sublayer, the queue manager gear, creating and destroying
connections;
• subnet level—establishes, manages and terminates a connection within the subnet.
In Table 3.5 shows the main parameters characterizing VDL.
3.2.11.2 VHF Datalink Applications
VDLs provide services related to ATS, AOC and AAC. In terms of ATS applica-
tions, these services include air traffic control and flight information services (FIS),
including the following services [35, 36]:
• tactical control messages;
• messages about the intention of the aircraft;
• automatic dependent surveillance (ADS) information;
• flight plan record;
• a disconnect request (e.g.„ before departure);
• access to weather databases;
• messages about weather changes in the air;
• warnings about weather hazards.
AOC communication provides messaging between the crew and the dispatcher,
which may include:
• meteorological information;
• “pilot-dispatcher” communication (CPDLC);
• weight and balance data;
• flight change information;
• information about the location and course of the flight;
• communications maintenance;
• alarm messages;
• avionics monitoring data;
• information about the delay of departure;
• special medical requests; checklists.
Table 3.5 The main parameters that characterize VDL
Mode Modulation Coding Transfer rate, kbps Media access control Function Range of radio Communication type
protocol (MAC frequencies, (DLS sublayer)
sublayer) MHz
1 AM-MSK – 2.4 CSMA Data 118.0–137.0
transmission
2 D8PSK Reed-Solomon 31.5 CSMA Data 118.0–137.0 Two-point simplex “air
transmission to-ground”
communication in
connection
establishment mode and
broadcast
communication in
connectionless mode
3 D8PSK Goley 31.5 TDMA Voice and data 118.0–137.0 Two-point and
transmission radial-multipoint
simplex “air-to-ground”
communications for
data transfer in
3.2 Justification of the Choice of Functional Tasks of Modern …
connectionless mode.
Simplex voice
communication
4 GFSK – 19.2 STDMA Data 108.0–137.0 Broadcast transmission
transmission (reception) “air-to-ground” and
118.0–137.0 “ground-to-air.”
(transmission) Two-point simplex
communication
“air-to-ground” and
“air-air”
137
Table 3.6 The main types of applications that apply to both VHF and other ATN subnets
Datalink application Datalink
Mode VHF HF Satellite
S Mode
1 2 3 4
CPDLC + + + + + + +
FIS + + + + + + +
ADS-C + + + + + +
ADS-B + +
ACAS + +
TIS + +
AAC communication applications include air and surface transportation, air ticket
reservations, material and technical support of transportation and other informa-
tion transmitted in the interest of maintaining or increasing the efficiency of flight
operations in general.
Table 3.6 summarizes the main types of applications that apply to both VHF and
other ATN subnets.
According to [35], practically, all types of aviation and some other mobile assets
can be consumers of VHF datalink:
• so-called planned air transport carriers (including international, main, regional,
switchable and cargo aviation carriers);
• unplanned aircraft carriers;
• general aviation;
• turboprop aircraft (including helicopters);
• non-engined aircraft;
• military aviation;
• land and sea moving assets.
VDL mode 1 was introduced ICAO at the initial stage of VDL implementation in
order to facilitate the transition to more efficient modes 2 and 3, until the maintenance
of the VDL subnet as an essential part of the ATN is widely available. VDL mode 1
uses the same kind of AM-MSK modulation as the current ACARS communications,
addressing and messaging system used in the USA. However, the DLS sublayer
protocols of the VDL modes 1, 2, 3, 4 are bit-oriented in contrast to the ACARS
protocol.
VDL mode 2 is selected by the US FAA for the national (internal) CPDLC creation
program. She began to function since 2000. EUROCONTROL has approved the use
of VDL mode 2 for the initial implementation of ATN in Europe.
More promising is mode 3, compatible with mode 2 by modulation type, but
representing the combination of data transmission in the ATN network and digital
voice command communication “air-to-ground” based on the use of TDMA protocol

at the MAC sublayer.
VDL mode 4 is introduced by ICAO to provide the ADS-B automatic dependent
surveillance mode. ICAO documents state that ADS-B is the basic application of
VDL mode 4. SARPs of VDL mode 4, adopted by ICAO, relate only to surveillance
functions, and the ATN does not support broadcast modes. Therefore, VDL mode 4
can only partially be considered the subnetwork of the ATN network, for which this
mode can provide two-point communication.
The list of the main and possible applications of VDL mode 4 is given in Table 3.7.
Communication and navigation tasks are included in the table only to show future
features.
Figure 3.2 shows the VDL mode 4 services with their separation between ATN
(implemented by the DLS sublayer) and specific services (implemented by the VSS
sublayer). Figure 3.3 shows the options for the implementation of end-to-end commu-
nication between the aircraft and the ground, which are provided by VDL mode 4
and ATN subnetworks.
To operate within the VHF datalink, the aircraft must be equipped with airborne
station providing the user function of the VHF datalink. A typical station scheme
contains a receiver, a transmitter and a DL processor, which in combination provide
for receiving and transmitting data (data transparency) independent of codes and
bytes. At the physical level of mode 4, the modulation (demodulation) of signals and
the encoding (decoding) of data are performed.
The ideology of using VHF datalink airborne stations provides for their connection
both with ATN ground stations and with other aircraft airborne stations. Connectivity
between application types operating within the ATN terminating ground stations is
provided through the implementation of transportlevel protocols. Connections at the
transport level between the airborne and ground terminal systems are supported by a
controlled change of intermediate ATN systems and VHF datalink subnet elements.
In [35], it is indicated that VHF digital communication radio stations can also
provide voice communication capability for the purpose of emergency backup of
VHF radio stations used for voice communication. Thus, neither the replacement of
analog VHF radio stations by digital ones, nor their integration is assumed.
The main requirements for the airborne VHF datalink station are set out in the
ARINC recommendations [35] and the ATN aviation telecommunication network
manual and its subsystems [37].
The transceiver of VDL mode 4 can be integrated with FMCS, navigation and
landing receivers and other avionics, which will ensure its integrated use for work
in the ADS-B system. In particular, it is possible to integrate with a MMR, which
includes a VHF DGNSS correction data receiver (VDB). Since this receiver, in
accordance with the ICAO standards [31], operates in the range of 108–118 MHz, it
is relatively easy to integrate it with the VDL mode 4 receiver.
Figure 3.4 shows an example of avionics architecture with VDL mode 4 stations.
Table 3.7 The list of the main and possible applications of VDL mode 4
Application naming Characteristic
Surveillance
ADS-B Automatic dependent surveillance broadcasting
is the main application of VDL mode 4
ADS-A (C) Automatic dependent surveillance—address
(contract) is a method of transmitting periodic
messages after establishing a connection with
the air traffic control unit at the initiative of the
aircraft
TIS-B (Traffic Information The traffic information service is broadcasting.
Service—Broadcast) Transmits from the ground to board
information on the movement of aircraft
according to radar data
CDTI (Cockpit Display of Traffic Information) Traffic information for cockpit displays. Based
on messages from other aircraft and ground
transportation
AIRSAW (Airborne Situational Awareness) Emergency airborne familiarization based on
ADS-B, TIS-B messages and CDTI usage
Ground situational awareness (pilot) Introduction to an emergency on the ground
based on ADS-B messages from aircraft, from
land transport and using CDTI
ATC surveillance Surveillance in ATC based on ADS-B and radar
data
A-SMGCS (Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and control over the movement of
Guidance and Control System) aircraft and other mobile objects on the airfield.
May include runway entry alerts
CD&R Definition of conflict and its resolution. Based
on ADS-B information and trajectory
information. Provides functional support for
ASAS
ASAS (Airborne Separation Assurance) Separation of aircraft trajectories based on
ADS-B, TIS-B messages and CD&R
algorithms
ACAS (Alert Collision Avoidance System) Aircraft collision avoidance function, which,
for safety reasons, must have support for a
technical system other than a TCAS system.
However, ADS-B data can serve as an
extension to ACAS
Pairwise crossing for trajectory negotiations Two-way communication to align paths.
Address service
PRM (Precision Runway Monitoring) Accurate runway monitoring based on ADS-B
messages
(continued)

Application naming Characteristic
AOC monitoring AOS service will be able to receive ADS-B
messages for its own fleet of aircraft on the
DATALINK mode 4 ground-based VHF
network
Communication
FIS-B (Flight Information Broadcast flight information services (services
Service—Broadcast) such as ATIS, VOLMET, PIREP, SIGMET)
CPDLC Communication line “controller-pilot.” Address
service
Digital FIS Targeted flight information services using
digital DATALINK
PDC (predeparture clearance) Runway clearance from vehicles before
departure
Navigation
GRAS (Ground-based Regional Support for the actions of the ground-based
Augmentation System) regional subsystem of the GNSS functional
supplement (flight en route, inaccurate
approach , movement on the surface of the
airfield)
CPDLC The connection "board - Accurate CDTI

Custom functions Non-ATN FIS-B
ADS-C board." Coordination of navigation. ASAS
and applications “ground-to- TIS-B
datalinks board” flight paths "board - Inaccurate landing Accurate runway
communication board" monitoring (PRM).
s Surveillance of movement
on the surface.
Secondary navigation
External data
GRAS "ground - board"
ATN
ADS-B
The main functions
supported by VDL
mode 4
Services of VDL Ground - board Ground - board Board - board Ground - board Board - board Ground - board Board - board
mode 4
ATN services Specific services of VDL mode 4
Fig. 3.2 VDL mode 4 services
3.2.12 Automatic Dependent Surveillance
As the most promising ATM method, automatic dependent surveillance (ADS) based
on digital PDS was recognized as the creator of the CNS/ATM concept.
Application
ATN tracer
AMSS datalink HF datalink VDL mode 4 (DLS) Specific Services

VDL mode 4 (VSS)
Mode S VDL mode 4 transceiver

datalink
Fig. 3.3 End-to-end communication implemented using VDL mode 4 and ATN subnets
Bus 1 GNSS GNSS Bus 2

receiver receiver
IRS
IRS
CMU
CMU
FMCS
FMCS
Indicator VDL mode 4 VDL mode 4 Indicator

radio station radio station
First pilot Co-pilot
Fig. 3.4 An example of avionics architecture with VDL mode 4 stations

Automatic dependent surveillance is the surveillance method, according to which

the aircraft automatically provides information to a specific user (with ADS-C (A))
or to any (with ADS-B) information received from airborne navigation systems and
positioning systems to the consumer [33].
In the case of ADS-C, automatic transmission from the aircraft of the periodical
messages begins after the initial connection of the aircraft with a specific ATC unit
has been initiated. The composition of the information and the frequency of its
transmission are determined by this ATC unit.
Broadcasting ADS (ADS-B) allows the aircraft to periodically transmit messages
on a broadcasting-type DL. This ability increases the amount of information about
the air situation both on the ground and aboard neighboring aircraft, which allows for
the observation function, as well as cooperative, “pilot-dispatcher,” and “pilot-pilot,”
air traffic management.
ICAO has determined the minimum number of messages to be transmitted by
each aircraft participating in ADS-B:
• category of aircraft in the ADS-B system;
• identifier of aircraft in the ADS-B system;
• latitude of aircraft;
• longitude of aircraft;
• height of aircraft;
• quality score.
In addition, additional message elements are defined:

• earth vector of aircraft, containing the track angle, track and vertical speed;
• the air vector containing the course, instrument speed or Mach number and vertical
speed;
• the closest intent containing the next intermediate point of the route and a given
height;
• turn speed;
• aircraft type.
The ADS-B system should function during all phases of the flight, including the
location of the aircraft at the airport. ADS-B information received via the airborne
lines can provide recommendations for the prevention of airborne collisions.
ADS-B also has several advantages and additional characteristics compared to
radar surveillance:
• The system is cheaper than radar.
• ADS-B data is disseminated and can be obtained by all users, including other
aircraft and other means of transport.
• Unambiguous identification of aircraft surveillance data during all phases of flight
is provided.
• ADS-B data contains more information than data received from an ordinary radar.
As a result of the operation of ADS-B, mobile users and dispatchers will receive
the same information, increase the level of security, management flexibility and air
traffic capacity.
In 2002, the State Civil Aviation Service of the Ministry of Transport of Russia
approved the “Concept for improving surveillance in the interests of civil aviation of
the Russian Federation.” This concept is consistent with the concept of CNS/ATM
and the “Observation Strategy for the European Civil Aviation Conference,” which
defines the automatic dependent observation using GNSS data as the main component
of the future surveillance system.
The concept of improving observation in the interests of civil aviation of the
Russian Federation is based on the use of a rational combination of various techno-
logical solutions in a specific geographic area. The basic technologies in the concept
are:
• primary surveillance radar (PSR);
• secondary surveillance radar (SSR);
• airfield survey radar;
• ADS-B;
• ADS-A.
The concept considers the following types of observation conditions:

• the airspace in which the observation of traditional PSR/SSR will be ensured
before the advent of ADS-B;
• airspace where the radar structure is absent or impractical;
• movement on the airfield;
• surveillance aboard the aircraft.
The concept of improving observation ensures the implementation of ICAO’s
future ATM concepts: free flight, transfer of responsibility on board the aircraft and
continuous service at all stages of flight “from the apron to the apron,” that is, from
the moment when the user communicates with the ATM system until the engines are
turned off.
The long-term goal of the concept is to ADS-B become the main surveillance
method for organizing air traffic in the Russian Federation.
Similar intentions regarding the use of ADS-B exist in other countries. In the USA,
for example, ADS-B is considered as the main surveillance system since 2010. In
Western Europe, the widespread use of ADS-B from 2003 to 2005.
At the 11th ICAO Air Navigation Conference, one of the main agenda items was
to review the state of “air-to-ground” and “air-to-air” communications. Regarding
the communication lines for ADS-B, the conference was informed that a comparative
analysis of three data transmission networks was carried out:
(a) a line based on longer, self-generated SSR mode S signals (1090ES);
(b) VDL mode 4;
(c) a DL based on a universal access transceiver (UAT).
The conference stated that in the USA, a decision was made to use for ADS-B
mode 1090ES aircraft, transport aircraft and other aircraft with high flight perfor-
mance, and the UAT should be used on GA aircraft. In Europe, EUROCONTROL
accepted recommendation on the use of 1090ES. A similar decision was made in
Australia and throughout Asia and the Pacific.
Having reviewed the reports of various expert groups, the conference adopted the
following recommendations:
“Recommendation 7/1. ADS-B implementation strategy in the near future.
States are encouraged to:
(a) note that the common element of most currently accepted approaches to the
speedy implementation of ADS-B is the selection of a more advanced self-
generated signal of the SSR mode S signal as the initial DL;
(b) take into account, as far as possible, this common element when choosing
their implementation options at the national and regional level, in order to help
ensure global interaction during the initial introduction of ADS-B.
Recommendation 7/2. Justification of requirements for ADS-B in the long
term.
It is recommended that:
(a) States recognized that, in the long term, the existing technology of the more
long-term self-generated SSR mode S signal may not be able to fully meet all
ADS-B service requirements throughout the entire airspace;
(b) ICAO continue to develop technical standards for ADS-B data link technology,
including the longer, self-generated SSR mode S signal, VDL mode 4 and UAT,
paying particular attention to the ICAO operational requirements for ADS-
B, availability of frequency spectrum and aspects of integration of airborne
equipment” [17].
Considering the above, when developing an integrated avionics system, it is
advisable to consider the option of implementing ADS-B with the data line 1090ES.
3.2.13 ATC Transponder, Airborne Collision Avoidance

System and Other Airborne Radar Equipment
According to the principle of operation, the airborne transponder of the ATC system
and the airborne collision avoidance system (ACAS) belong to the airborne radar
equipment [38]. At the same time, the function of the ATC transponder is to auto-
matically transmit to the ground (or, in S mode, and to another aircraft) the informa-
tion necessary for ATC. The transponder is together with the SSR secondary radar
system.
The main modes of operation of the responders are the “ATC” modes (reception—
at 740 MHz, transmission—at 837.5 MHz; russian signal format), “RBS” and “S”
(reception—at 1030 MHz, transmission—at 1090 MHz; international signal format).
Their parameters are regulated by Russian and international norms and standards
[39, 40].
The mode S secondary radar channel organically enters the CNS/ATM concept
and is considered by ICAO as one of the main means of providing information in the
nodal areas and in the continental airspace with high traffic density, as well as the
DL providing ADS-B.
ACAS is not included within the CNS/ATM concept of any of the CNS equipment
groups by ICAO. It is considered as a “related system” that provides information to
flight crews and nearby flying aircraft and serves as the last collision avoidance tool.
ACAS is not considered a substitute for ATC service. At the same time, the adoption
by international aviation organizations of aircraft operations without ACAS led to
the widespread installation of ACAS on board an aircraft.
Currently, manufacturers of avionics of airborne systems—firms Collins, Honey-
well, Allied Signal—supply ACAS equipment together with the respondent of the
“RBS” and “S” modes.
Along with the expanding use of ACAS and the S mode respondent, Russia
continue to operate ATC and RBS respondents, while the RBS mode respondents
working in the ranges and with common antenna systems, respectively, RSBN and
DME.
Thus, from the point of view of the perspective of the tasks and the frequency
range, there is every reason to include ATC response mode in the integrated avionics
of navigation, landing, data exchange and ATC.
Perhaps the inclusion in the integrated avionics receivers LORAN and ADF.
In addition to the considered equipment (modes), the FNC includes a number of
other systems (subsystems) that are related to airborne radar equipment. On military
aircraft, typical systems of this group are DSDM and RA, on civilian aircraft—
RA and WXR. In each of the types of equipment mentioned, there are problems
and opportunities for integration, and, in our opinion, these problems can be solved
within the framework of another system of education, which can be conventionally
called airborne integrated radar equipment.
Another way is to improve the named systems without integration with other
equipment. This applies primarily to DSDM and RA.
DSDM is autonomous radiotechnical systems and is deployed on many airplanes
and helicopters of the Air Force and Navy. When using the DSDM as a sensor of
the number systems of the way, the errors of the navigation computer and the course
system have a much greater influence on the accuracy of the number system than
the accuracy of the DSDM. Therefore, the development of DSDM is on the way to
improve the mass-dimension characteristics, rather than improving accuracy [41].
Accuracies of Russian DSDM are inferior to foreign ones that are at the level of
potentially achievable, only 1.5 times, and their mass is 2 times greater.
DSDM has a specific design that is placed on a common frame with antennas
mounted on it. The entire monoblock is mounted on a folding radio transparent
radome and is placed in the cut-out of the skin of the lower fuselage of the aircraft.
There is a thorough adjustment of the axes of the antenna system relative to the axes
of the aircraft.
At the military aircraft, DSDM is used almost continuously throughout the flight.
Due to the indicated functional and design features of DSDM, as well as due to
the fact that its frequency range lies well above the frequencies of other avionics
systems, the inclusion of DSDM in the integrated equipment does not give a gain.
Low-altitude radio altimeters (e.g., PB-85, A-037) are used during approach,
landing and piloting at low altitudes (from 0 to 1500 m). The output signals of the
RA at low altitudes are the altitude data, the altitude failure signal and the altitude
readiness signal, which allows the altitude data to be used. These signals are sent to
the ACS. In addition, a signal is sent to the aircraft intercom to reach the sun of a
given decision-making height [41].
Russian RAs are almost as accurate as foreign models. The difference in their
mass is also small. Therefore, their inclusion in integrated equipment also does not
give a gain.
WXRs are used to detect significant weather events for piling (thunder, turbulence,
wind shear) and to provide meteo-navigation information either to their own indicator
or to a multifunctional indicator shared by several systems.
The IFF transponder is a medium with ad hoc emission and should be included
throughout the flight over the territory of its state. Therefore, the inclusion of its
functions in the integrated avionics is inappropriate. The IFF interrogator in some
cases is part of the airborne radar and operates in accordance with the cyclogram
embedded in the digital computer of this radar.
Implementation in the integrated avionics of the functional tasks of the systems
listed in paragraphs 3.2.2–3.2.13 will ensure the fulfillment of the following general
requirements for navigation equipment of aircraft:
• globality of navigation support as the ability of equipment to navigate and control
the flight of an aircraft in any region of the globe;
• continuity of navigation support in the interests of flight control of aircraft;
• automation of navigation calculations;
• ensuring single and group flights and the use of aircraft launchers in any weather
conditions, above any surface, at any time of the day;
• ensuring interaction with field control systems and air traffic control services,
taking into account the accepted division of airspace;
• ensuring approach of landing and landing on any of the existing instrumental
landing systems of aircraft.
3.2.14 Integration of Surveillance Equipment
One of the options for the integration of equipment that performs the functions of
observation is the integrated surveillance system (ISS), the specification of which is
issued ARINC [42]. The ISS equipment is designed to solve several functional tasks
of observation: prevention of collisions of airplanes in the air (TCAS), transponder
of ATC (ATC RBS/S), WXR and TAWS. It is assumed that ISS will be installed on
commercial transport aircraft with digital communications (ARINC 429 or Ethernet

ARINC 664), both future and modernized. Four ISS configurations are provided:
Configuration A (TCAS, ATC transponder, WXR, TAWS);
Configuration B (TCAS, ATC transponder);
C configuration (TCAS, TAWS);
Configuration D (TCAS, ATC transponder, TAWS).
The main purpose of creating an ISS is to place it on simplified aircraft and reduce
the cost of the life cycle through integration. Another goal is to create a platform for
the implementation of future surveillance capabilities, such as ADS-B.
The ISS equipment consists of three or four separate devices depending on the
configuration:
processor device used in all configurations;
WXR antenna array device;
control panel (can be shared between TCAS/ATC and WXR);
TCAS/ATC antenna.
The ISS processor unit provides signal processing, including radio frequency
signal processing (TCAS/ATC), and power supply. The WXR antenna array device
comprises a 9300–9500 MHz antenna, an antenna scanning control mechanism and
an RF module. The high-frequency signal of an WXR must be processed to ensure
transmission to the ISS processor through a standard cable, eliminating the need for
waveguide coupling between the antenna and the processor.
In configuration C, the ISS equipment could interact with integrated avionics
of navigation, landing, data exchange and air traffic control, including the ATC
transponder mode.
Another solution that differs from the ARINC project may be the creation of
integrated airborne avionics for monitoring and warning of proximity to earth, which
operates in the “RBS,” “S,” “ES 1090” modes [43]. In all these modes, the GNSS
receiver is operating, providing the avionics with data on the navigation parameters
of its own aircraft. At the same time, in any of the modes or independently, the
station VDL mode 4 or ATC transponder mode S, which is part of this equipment,
can operate.
To solve the problems of warning in this integrated avionics, an electronic data
bank of the surface topography is used.
The data of the control of the modes and frequencies of the avionics and other
information systems of the aircraft, as well as the issuance of data from the avionics
to the other systems, is carried out in accordance with ARINC 429.
The proposed integration option makes it possible to jointly operate the integrated
avionics with the existing TCAS and WXR equipment, including the integration of
the display of terrain observation data and WXR into crew cab.
Given the common frequency range and polarization, integration of ISS and DME
avionics is possible, including operation on a common lower antenna. This option
will provide redundancy of DME equipment on long-range aircraft witch airborne
surveillance equipment.
3.2.15 The Implementation of the Concept of CNS/ATM

in Military Aviation
The concept of CNS/ATM, adopted by ICAO, defines the development of interna-

tional civil aviation. Military aircraft are qualified as state aircraft and are not subject
to international registration. Many of them do not have civil avionics approved by
ICAO. In order for military aviation to operate in the CNS/ATM operating envi-
ronment, it must have an appropriate avionics and follow standard procedures and
standards.
The bases for the transition of military aviation to functioning in a CNS/ATM
environment are:
equipment of dual-purpose avionics military aircraft;
the development of military standards that are in line with the CNS/ATM concept.
Since the end of the 90s, work has been carried out in the USA to install airborne
equipment on military aircraft that meets the civil requirements of ATM and military
safety standards. First of all, such equipment was equipped with transport and cargo
airplanes, fuel tankers and aircraft for the high command. By the end of 2005, it was
planned to re-equip more than 1700 transport aircraft [44].
Currently, for the same purpose, the modernization of US tactical aircraft is carried
out. The main areas of modernization are:
• ensuring the operation of the VHF radio ATC stations with a frequency step of
8.33 kHz;
• deployment of S and 1090ES mode transponders;
• revision of navigation computers, which guarantee the flight of an airplane along
a given trajectory in the horizontal plane in accordance with the requirements of
RNP/RNAV;
• installation of air data computers and other changes, which allow to reduce the
difference in vertical separation heights from 2000 to 1000 ft at set flight altitudes
[45].
The modernization will provide the possibility of flying US military aircraft in the
airspace of Europe according to the rules of EUROCONTROL, which has developed
a map of the interaction of civilian and military routes in the CNS/ATM system. This
document discusses certification procedures for military aircraft and the procedure
for moving to mandatory European requirements.
In tactical aviation, equipment is upgraded on F-15, F-16, C-2A, C-2C aircraft
(in terms of VHF radio stations, mode S, RNP/RNAV), P-3C, E-2C (in terms of
VHF radio stations, RNP/RNAV). US Navy aircraft based on civilian aircraft (C-9B,
C-12B, C-200/G, C-37A, etc.) are equipped with TCAS II, EGPWS, VHF radio
stations, ILS receivers and air data computers. On a number of aircraft, regimes S
and 1090ES, ADS-B and RNP/RNAV are introduced [45].
Military functional requirements (FDR) have been created in the USA, which
determine the zone navigation of military aircraft according to the RNP RNAV rules
and the observation of ADS-B [46]. They take into account the specifics of tactical
military aircraft flights, since for large military cargo and transport aircraft, the tran-
sition to CNS/ATM is practically the use of civil aviation avionics. The purpose of
the FDR is to harmonize standards to ensure safe separation of military and civil air
traffic. The document does not cover issues of vertical guidance, temporary problems
and 4D navigation. The document provides for the use of:
• GPS receivers operating in the military PPS standard;
• electronic digital aeronautical information files of the flight database (DAFIF) of
the US National Agency NIMA;
• transponder mode S (along with continued use of modes A and C) and its
functional extension 1090ES for ADS-B.
To use the latter, a digital transponder ARX-118 is being developed, combining
the functional tasks of the 1090ES and IFF transpondent Mark XII.
Manufacturers of avionics are very active in the field of extended use of civil
avionics on military aircraft. Firms Rockwell Collins, Honeywell, Sextant, Allied
Signal and other avionics suppliers are rapidly equipping military aircraft with
systems that provide flight safety, such as EGPWS, TCAS II, flight data recorders
and cockpit voice recorders.
The US Air Force is modernizing tanker and transport aircraft for free flight under
the Global Air Traffic Management (GATM) program. A number of foreign firms are
implementing their own programs for equipping military aircraft with GPS receivers
integrated with INS, FMS, HF and VHF communication transceivers [47].
3.3 Architecture and Main Characteristics of CNS/ATM

Airborne Equipment in ARINC Documents
3.3.1 Basic ARINC Documents Defining Functional Tasks

and CNS/ATM Airborne Equipment Architecture
The ICAO Committee on Future Air Navigation Systems (FANS) has developed
reports defining the air navigation infrastructure for CNS/ATM. As a result of the
FANS actions, the ATA FANS and IATA FMS working groups developed US airline
plans to use the FANS infrastructure in order to significantly increase the economic
benefits of operation. With their introduction, the Subcommittee on System Architec-
ture and Interfaces (SAI) of the Airline Electronics Engineering Committee (AEEC)
in 1995 developed avionic architectures for use on new and modified aircraft, which
compiled the ARINC 660 report on “CNS/ATM Aeronautical Equipment, Functional
Placement and Recommended Architectures” [44].
In 2001, ARINC released the revised report ARINC 660A, which defines the
architecture of airborne avionics much more widely and in detail for working in the
CNS/ATM environment [48]. This document heads the ARINC family of interrelated
3.3 Architecture and Main Characteristics of CNS/ATM Airborne … 151
documents (651, 652, 653, 656, 739A, 743A, 755, 756, 758, 760, 762, etc.), which
together define the functions, structure, characteristics, interfaces, requirements for
embedded control and design of the main components of the airborne CNS/ATM
avionics. This family is also joined by a number of RTCA documents.
3.3.2 CNS/ATM Airborne Avionics Concept in ARINC 660A
3.3.2.1 Basic Requirements for CNS/ATM Avionics
The ARINC 660A report highlights the widespread use of data links, GNSS naviga-
tion, and various surveillance capabilities to increase awareness of the situation on
board the aircraft. It also includes advanced avionics equipment architectures, func-
tional definition and functional placement. The recommendations contained therein
are intended to shape the point of view of aircraft developers, data link service
providers, aircraft equipment developers and other participants in the development
of aircraft. This document represents the agreed point of view of US airlines and
industry.
Avionic architecture designed to reduce the cost and time of modifying avionics
by changing, mainly, software. Focusing on the development of software, airlines
require the expansion of the functionality of avionics.
The ARINC 660A describes the highest level requirements for CNS/ATM aircraft.
It is indicated that it is necessary to take into account each of them in the design
of avionics for CNS/ATM operating environment. Let us highlight some of the
requirements relating to the architectural features of avionics.
Flight application. Airplanes equipped with CNS/ATM avionics include “classic”
aircraft without FMS, aircraft equipped with limited expansion FMS and new aircraft
with more advanced FMS with greater expansion potential. The CNS/ATM architec-
ture should provide common modification components for all aircraft types. The goal
is to enable the airline to equip its fleets in parallel with the same units of equipment
and the same functions.
Common crew interfaces. The CNS/ATM architecture should provide a user-friendly
interface for the crew for all communication, navigation and surveillance functions.
ATS interfaces. The goal is to provide a user-friendly interface of air traffic services
(ATS) for the crew and a methodology of operations common to the entire fleet. At
the same time, there are practical and financial restrictions on the use of common
crew interfaces on older aircraft with analog connections.
Outdated aircraft. Airlines, as a rule, would like to operate the aircraft for more than
20 years after the end of their manufacture. On such aircraft, the CNS/ATM avionics
installation should not require a significant modernization of the aircraft.
Modern aircraft model. The new avionics, designed for the modern model of aircraft,
should apply the architecture of an “open” system, which is free from unique
restrictions.
Future aircraft. Requirements for future aircraft are especially important in two
specific ways. First, the avionics architecture and final configuration must be devel-
oped in advance and taken into account when designing the aircraft. Secondly, the
design of a new aircraft should include the architecture of an “open” avionics system
that allows for sufficient functional independence. In this type of architecture, adjust-
ment, modification and functional addition with minimal impact on other systems
should be possible. Closed or unique architectures should be excluded.
Flexibility. CNS/ATM functionality will evolve over time. Therefore, it is necessary
that the CNS/ATM architecture, hardware and software support these changes in
a way that minimizes not only the initial development cost, but also the total cost
of ownership associated with the evolving CNS/ATM infrastructure. To this end,
airlines approve the following concepts used in the development of avionics:
(a) portable software.
The use of standard software packages is encouraged by the expansion of the appli-
cation database. Standardization could ensure software reuse and depreciate soft-
ware development costs across multiple deployments. This could reduce the cost
of each application. Reuse of aviation software on an aircraft can also facilitate the
development of low-cost training equipment;
(b) flexible structure of equipment and software.
The equipment must be flexible and have general application software that can be
easily modified by the manufacturer. You should also allow the user to select the
options of supplied and specialized avionics that do not require software changes.
(c) hardware–software separation.
The separation (decomposition) should separate the hardware from the software
according to the logical and controlling entity and ensure sufficient isolation, so
that a part or sum of new parts does not act on other parts. Separation of hardware
and software is becoming especially important for systems with a large number of
integrated functionality. Rules for hardware and software separation are provided by
the ARINC 651.
Expansion. CNS/ATM equipment should provide integrated connectivity and support
for a full set of CNS/ATM functions. The need to modify the hardware should be
minimal.
High reliability. The CNS/ATM architecture should provide an optimal combination
of reliability and availability to reduce the life cycle cost of the equipment. The
design process should consider resistance to failures and redundant configurations
that optimize the relationship between cost and functionality.
Convenience of operation (maintainability). The CNS/ATM architecture must

support design and integration standards that, when possible, simplify maintainability
on board and in the workshop. These standards should provide an equally high level
of maintainability, both for aircraft with analog connections, and for aircraft with
digital connections, as well as for aircraft with or without a central service system.
3.3.2.2 The Functional Structure of the Airborne CNS Avionics [48]
The highest level of CNS avionics functional structure is presented in Fig. 3.5. The
functional tasks of CNS are divided into three groups:
(a) navigation, including navigation itself, flight planning, forecasts and guidance
(Fig. 3.6);
(b) communication, including control of the data link, protocol translation,
message routing, network management (Fig. 3.7);
(c) surveillance, including data on terrain, air traffic, weather, and conflict
detection (Fig. 3.8).
The hardware tools for solving CNS functional tasks are:

(a) for navigation—GNSS, DME, VOR, ILS, MLS, GLS avionics, as well as other
sensors (e.g., air data system and INS);
(b) for communication—connected HF, VHF systems and SATCOM;
(c) for surveillance—TCAS, secondary radar transponder, ADS-B, other aircraft
sensors.
The navigation functional group interacts with the communication functional
group by obtaining the flight plan and issuing information about the aircraft position,
current RNP characteristics and the expected flight trajectory.
CNS function
Aircraft position, RNP, EPU
Radio navigation Navigation data Navigation Flight path intent
means
Automatic configuration,
Navigation Deviation commands Dashboard
commands
GNSS, DME, VOR, ILS, Flight planning Integral observation
displays
MLS, GLS Strategic and tactical flight
planning
Predictions Strategic conflicts
Guidance
Flight Planning Requests, Tactical conflicts
Wind
Datalink MSG
Sensors
ADS
Inertial
Communication Aircraft
Flight control
Radio communications "Ground - configuration Autopilot
board"
Thrust control
VHF
HF
SATCOM Management, Communication "Ground - board"
Surveillance
communication Datalink Management ATS Terrain TCAS
“Board - ATC
ground”
Broadcast protocol Communications Air traffic
ADS-B
Crew controls Message routing Weather transponders
"Grond - board"
Control panels Network management ATS Conflict detection
Keyboard Communications
Radio altitude Radars
Cursor
Fig. 3.5 The highest level of CNS avionics functional structure

Sensors Airborne function Advanced Image Sensors

ADS/inertial
Aircraft position, ANP (EPU)
Navigation
Aircraft position
assessment Dashboard
Radio altimeter displays
Predictions Guidance
Settings,
Trajectory Management Commands,
Navigation radio commands
construction teams deviations
means Flight control
GNSS, DME, VOR, ILS,
MLS, GLS
Navigation database Machine
Control
Communication functions Aircraft personification
Voice database
Surveillance function
Data transmission Air traffic
Data broadcasting Terrain
Weather
Procedures, RNP
Crew controls Optimal routing

Flight plan
Control panels Recording
Keyboard Strategic conflicts
Set the trajectory Voice
Cursor
Flight data
Datalink data
Fig. 3.6 Functional navigation structure
Voice control
System
Crew controls
Communication management function
АОС
Mode/Setting
CPDLC, FIS, TIS Primary flight
displays
AOC
VDR CPDLC
ARINC 750
ADS
Surveillance
function
SATCOM
ARINC 741 or Subnet Router
ARINC 761 interface Flight plan Navigation
function
Flight plan request
HFDL
ARINC 753
Recording
LAN of the
terminal
ARINC 763 Buffer
Other local ARINC 664

networks Printer
Fig. 3.7 Functional structure of communication
The navigation functional group interacts with the surveillance functional group
by receiving information about strategic conflicts and issuing information about the
position of the aircraft, current characteristics of the RNP and the intended aircraft
trajectory.
Functional communication and surveillance collectives jointly provide two-way
data links for the ATS.
Surveillance function
ADS/IRS Advanced image
Terrain sensors
Detection of strategic
TAWS conflict with the terrain
Radar
Terrain
Radar map of the merging
area
Radio
altimeter
Tactical warnings
Air traffic
ATC
transponder Detection
strategic conflict in
TCAS airspace
Communication
(VHF, HF, Airspace data Primary flight
SATCOM) ADS-B
merging displays
TIS/TIS-B
Communication
function
(voice, data, data
broadcasting) Air traffic
Weather
PWS Prioritization of alerts

Crew controls
Surveillance data combining
RWS
Navigation
The condition and intent of the aircraft, RNP/EPU function
Turbulence
Flight control
(autopilot, auto
throttle) Strategic weather threat detection
FIS
Weather data merging
Weather
Fig. 3.8 Functional structure of observation
3.3.2.3 Functional Structure of Communication
In the general case, the operating environment of the data transmission line includes
elements of the final air navigation system associated with the ATN. The final air
navigation system determines the use of the data link. Communication services or
a network deliver data from one end system to another. A communication network
may include separate subnets.
For economic reasons, it is possible to divide the resources of the communication
system between ATM, AAS, AOC, ARS, when allowed by the rules.
The communication network should include priority systems for protecting
various types of data if resources are separated. The CNS/ATM concept includes
the additional use of a data and voice line for ATM communication if the data line
is the primary means of communication.
When developing data lines, a smooth transition from character-oriented proto-
cols to bit-oriented protocols with minimal software upgrades is necessary. Some
scenarios may require the use of two or more protocols.
In any case, the communications architecture must be flexible and adapt to the
requirements of an individual airline. It is assumed that the ATN can also transition
between different levels of capability through its evolution.
In general, an ATN may consist of the following connected subnets:
• ACARS or aviation VHF control line (AOA);
• VDL mode 2;
• VDL mode 3;
• VDL mode 4;
• SATCOM data link;
• HF data link;
• other receiving subnets.
Voice communication continues to exist between the aircraft and the ATM for the
transmission of security-critical control commands. It serves as a backup resource
for failing equipment and is adapted to aircraft that are not equipped with a data line.
The following speech subnets are expected to be applied:
• VHF (AM DSB with frequency channel spacing of 25 and 8.33 MHz; VDL mode
3);
• HF communication;
• satellite communication.
A decrease in the importance of voice communications HF is expected as a result
of the increasing availability of satellite and HF digital communications.
One or more of the following formats can be used to automatically download a
flight plan:
• transfer of a flight plan for AOC in the format ARINC 702A;
• transfer of the weather profile in the points of the route by AOC in the format
ARINC 702A;
• transfer of the AOC flight plan in ARINC 656 format;
• the transfer of the weather profile in the points of the route by AOC in the format
ARINC 656;
• disconnection of ATS routes in RTCA DO-219 format;
• disconnection of ATS routes in ICAO ATN SARPS format.
3.3.2.4 Functional Navigation Structure
Navigation in the CNS/ATM environment is performed by solving the following

functional tasks:
• route and terminal area navigation, including a curvilinear approach;
• automatic loading of the flight plan;
• required arrival time (RTA);
• RNP compliant navigation with an unreliable location estimate (RTCA DO-
236/EUROCAE ED-75);
• DGNSS approach possible for categories I/II/III;
• control and guidance system when moving on a surface (SMGCS);
• vertical guidance.
GNSS navigation provides data on three-dimensional (3D) position, velocity and
time vector (PVT). A GNSS sensor must provide sufficient accuracy, integrity, avail-
ability and continuity for area navigation (RNAV) if it is used as the only means of
navigation.
In the case of a multi-sensor RNAV, the navigation decision is made based on the
use of GNSS data, filtered together with data from other navigation sensors, such as
inertial, DME, ILS or MLS, to provide better PVT estimates.
At a minimum, two-dimensional area navigation (2D RNAV) should be provided.
It includes PVT, flight plan task, side (2D) guidance, control and display interface.
Navigation equipment should provide three-dimensional area navigation (3D
RNAV). It includes PVT, flight plan setting, side and vertical (3D) guidance, control
and display interface. For systems without the possibility of predicting the functional
characteristics, a simplified geometric three-dimensional navigation solution should
be used.
In some applications, four-dimensional area navigation (4D RNAV) may be neces-
sary. It includes PVT, flight plan task, projected flight plan functional capabilities,
side, vertical and speed and time guidance (4D), control and display interface.
A flight planning function should be provided that will allow flight plan data to
be entered by the crew and/or via a data link from the ATS ground system or airline
dispatcher using the elements included in the RTCA DO-241 document.
Autopilot and flight control mechanisms should be provided with guidance signals
for lateral control (LNAV) for all segments defined in the flight plan.
Navigation equipment should provide guidance for vertical control (VNAV) in
accordance with the vertical flight profile, including:
• climb and descent at a constant speed;
• descend without jolts;
• flight level segment;
• cruising climb.
The estimated speed or management of the load should be determined, collectives
coordinating LNAV, VNAV and speed to ensure the required arrival time (RTA) at
route points specified in the field plan must be provided.
Navigation equipment must have the necessary memory capacity and processing
performance to support the use of a worldwide navigation database with the ability
to periodically update and provide NOTAM input both manually and from a data
link. The database should be based on WGS-84.
It should be possible to generate data and an interface with two independent main
navigation displays for current images with a selectable preview option.
Navigation equipment in conjunction with the equipment of the observation
systems should provide the means to confirm that the flight plan provides adequate
separation from the terrain and obstacles to autonomous operations of the aircraft in
the environment of free flight.
Navigation equipment should provide control commands for the autopilot for an
inaccurate approach to a minimum descent height using RNAV GNSS and barometric
altitude.
Exact approach and landing should be performed using ILS, MLS and GLS. It is
necessary to support all landing regimes, since regional solutions and strategies for
transition to CNS/ATM may be different. In order to achieve precision approach to
categories I/II and landing category III, the following is required:
• combined receiver ILS, MLS, GLS for airplanes with digital communications;
• GNSS category I approach with WAAS, LAAS and GLS precision approach data;
• an I/II category approach using GLS;
• category III landing with GLS, consistent with ICAO SARPS;
• interface with autopilot and flight systems;
• mode and runway selection, ILS/MLS setting and notification;
• cab control and display interfaces.
3.3.2.5 Functional Structure of Surveillance
The functional tasks of surveillance include the surveillance of air traffic, terrain and
weather, including:
• route line data messages (WPR);
• automatic dependent surveillance (ADS);
• elementary surveillance;
• extended surveillance;
• TIS/TIS-B;
• ADS-B;
• track information for the cab display (CDTI);
• obstruction and terrain data;
• weather data.
The functional structure of motion surveillance, corresponding to the general
functional structure (Fig. 3.8), is shown in Fig. 3.9.
The cornerstone of the CNS concept is ADS-B. An extended implementation
of ADS-B in ATM is envisaged, which includes the user’s preferred trajectory and
independent separation of aircraft in the designated airspace.
An aircraft equipped with ADS-B transmits highly accurate broadcast position,
velocity, time and identity (PVTI) data. ADS-B ground stations accept this data for
an ATM target. In addition, this aircraft can receive and process the ADS-B data
directly from another aircraft.
The ADS-B architecture must meet the airline’s requirements for minimum
installation of equipment and minimal impact on aircraft installation.
The ADS-B data concentration function should receive data on the current state
of the aircraft, and, if available, data on the expected trajectory for the trajectory
prediction function.
Position, velocity, time and identity (PVTI) data are concentrated and provide the
transmission function for broadcasting to other aircraft and ADS-B ground stations.
The data concentration function thus generates the data of the “own aircraft” for
performing the surveillance and for the data merging function. The data merging
function integrates the data of its own aircraft, ADS-B data and other surveillance
data (e.g., TCAS, TIS-B) to provide the crew with surveillance information. This
surveillance information is displayed on various display facilities, including graphic
Integrated avionics
Aircraft Trajectory
sensors prediction
function
Data concentration function Transfer function
ADS-B
control
function
Surveillance data processing and merging Receive function
Other Cockpit
airborne display system
systems
Fig. 3.9 Functional structure of motion surveillance
displays, visual and audible alarm devices and other means. Other airborne systems
may also use observation information.
Some ADS-B functions may require duplexing and/or monitoring to meet integrity
and availability requirements.
ADS-B top-level requirements are defined in RTCA DO-242.
ADS-B data may be displayed on crew flight instruments as an integrated part of
the motion information function for the cockpit display (CDTI). The CDTI may also
include TCAS and Traffic Information Services (TIS/TIS-B) integrated data.
CDTI requirements are defined in RTCA DO-243.
There are various architectural solutions that a system developer should consider:
(a) direct connection of air data sources and inertial data for accurate (unfiltered)
timely data entry for wind gust detection;
(b) Connection of communication control functions. This will provide data on
cold wind, temperature and turbulence from the aircraft to the earth to improve
the quality of the ground-based atmospheric modeling, and provide weather
data generated by these models, as well as radar and satellite images, from
the ground to the aircraft. Another use of airborne data on the ground is to
automatically inform the air traffic control service of tactical and strategic
threats as soon as they are detected by the surveillance function.
(c) Connection to the navigation function. This connection can receive data on
the state of the aircraft (coordinates of the position on three axes, speed and
acceleration) and intentions (planned position coordinates on the three axes and
speed in some time). The connection allows the surveillance function to inform
the flight planning function of strategic threats, which allows the FMS to offer
alternative routes on an adaptive basis. This connection is recommended for
new aircraft.
(d) Connection to dashboard displays, which are used for tactical and strategic
navigation and planning. This connection provides the crew with an overview
of various potential threats along the route. This overview can be used to change
route points, points of departure, areas and orientations.
(e) Direct or indirect connection to the inputs of the crew unit.
As mentioned above, ICAO as a basic implementation of the radio link for
ADS-B was accepted by the respondent of mode 1090ES. If the monitoring
functions shaded in Fig. 3.8 are performed by the FMS, then when developing
an integrated avionics combining the aircraft’s radio sensors with the FMS,
it is reasonable to include the transmit and receive functions of the S mode
transponder in the integrated avionics.
3.3.2.6 Recommended Architectures and Functional Allocation of CNS

Avionics
The avionics kit recommended in the ARINC 660A is designed for use on a large
number of aircraft types from the old “classic” aircraft to the modern aircraft with
FMS/EFIS. The main equipment includes:
• flight management computer system (FMCS);
• communications control unit (CMU);
• multipurpose control and display unit (MCDU);
• GNSS navigation unit (GNU);
• multimode landing receiver (MMR).
On a number of aircraft, navigation functions can be integrated with the landing
receiver in the form of a GNSS navigation and landing unit (GNLU).
Kernel equipment should support all the functions prepared to date, as well as
provide expansion to the full set of CNS/ATM functions in the long term. Expansion
of the system should be carried out by adjusting the software and minimal hardware
changes. Variants of architectures using components defined in ARINC 660A are
presented as architectures 1 and 2 in Figs. 3.10 and 3.11.
The ARINC 660A does not include a comprehensive set of equipment configura-
tions that may be required for a particular aircraft. This document only recommends
the use of equipment, which, in accordance with the AEEC recommendations, is
described as functional allocation in it. More specifically, the functions of each of
these devices are described in the relevant ARINC specifications.
VHF, HF, The main field

SATCOM of view.
datalink CMU Signaling
(ARINC 758) devices
Air data
Recorder
(ARINC 757
or
ARINC 767)
Altitude and
heading GNSS NAV
(ARINC 756 MCDU
(IRS) (ARINC 739A)
or
ARINC 760)
DME
Autopilot
VOR/ILS
Navigation
and display
Flight
instruments
WXR TAWS TCAS/XPDR

(ARINC 708А) (ARINC 562) (ARINC 735/718)
Equipment designations: existing ; additional functionality;

---- new optional
Fig. 3.10 Architecture 1—classic aircraft. Note To determine the interface should be based on the
specific characteristics of ARINC. Some functions in these blocks can be integrated
3.3.3 GNSS Navigation Device Corresponding to the ARINC

760-1 Characteristic
A GNSS navigation device (GNU), corresponding to ARINC 760-1 [49], must be

connected to a control and display device, an antenna, and have a communication
interface with other aircraft systems for operation as part of GNSS. GNU functions
are divided into baseline, provision and optional (Table 3.8).
GNU should be an integrated unit that provides:
• reception and processing of GNSS radio signals;
• issuing PVT data to other aircraft systems;
VHF, HF, The main

SATCOM field of view.
datalink CMU Signaling
(ARINC 758) devices
Air data Recorder

(ARINC 757 or
ARINC 767)
Altitude and MCDU

FMS (ARINC 739A)
heading
(ARINC 702A)
(IRS)
Autopilot
Navigation and
display GNSS MMR
(ARINC 755
or
ARINC 756)
Navigation Flight
management instruments
/GLS
WXR TAWS TCAS/XPDR

(ARINC 708А) (ARINC 762) (ARINC 735/718)
Equipment designations: existing; additional functionality;

---- new optional
Fig. 3.11 Architecture 2—airplane with FMS/EFIS. Note To determine the interface should be
based on the specific characteristics of ARINC. Some functions in these blocks can be integrated
• storing all navigation data required for the system, including the navigation
database loaded on board;
• receiving and issuing navigation data via both analog and digital interfaces;
• FMS functions, including an interface with an electronic display system;
• receiving configuration data from the data loader, aircraft personification module
(APM), programmable outputs, MCDU or from another CMU with double
installation.
FMS functions must comply with ARINC 702A, GNSS sensor functions with
ARINC 743A.
The functional structure of GNU and its main links are shown in Fig. 3.12.
Table 3.8 GNU functions

GNU function Function status
Navigation functions
GNSS receiver Contract
Calculation of position, speed and time (PVT) Contract
Receiver autonomous integrity monitoring (RAIM) Contract
Predictive RAIM (PRAIM) Optional
PVT data output conforming to ARINC 743A Contract
GNSS external receiver data entry in accordance with ARINC 743A Contract
Functional addition Contract
Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) Contract
External interface of the local supplement system (LAAS) Contract
ADS-B interface Contract
Crew interface General
Flight planning General
GNSS navigation General
Multi-sensor navigation Contract
DME-DME Contract
IRS/INS Contract
Transverse (lateral) navigation General
Vertical navigation Contract
Inaccurate approach (2D Nav) General
3D approach Contract
Navigation database (NDB) General
Flight forecast/performance monitoring General
Required arrival time (RTA) Contract
Required Navigation Perfomance (RNP)/Navigation Perfomance (ANP) (in General
accordance with MASPS RTCA SC-181)
Monitoping ydepivani General
Duplicate System Operation Contract
Flight System Interfaces General
Lateral guidance General
Vertical guidance Contract
Missing display (Missing approach point (MAP)) Contract
Flight annunciators General
Surveillance Contract
ADS data Contract
ADS-B/ACAS data Contract
(continued)

GNU function Function status
Communication interfaces Contract
Flight data ATS/AOC Contract
Route Negotiations ATM Contract
Flight Simulator Interface General
Maintenance Functions
Offline Detection and Failure Reporting General
Centralized Fault Reporting Interface (using ARINC 604, either 624, or using General
the MCDU)
Return to Service Testing General
Data upload function General
Automatic Control Equipment (ATE) General
Aircraft Data loader IRS/AHRS DME СВС OMS/

personification Fuel gauge #1, #2, #3 #1, #2 #1, #2 CFDS Printer
module
2
2
3
To signaling devices
Chronometer 2 ARINC 743A data

Navigation database
(ARINC 424) Navigation function
(ARINC 702A) MCDU
External #1, #2
GNSS receiver
(optional) Input / output
device CMU/MU
#1, #2
ADS/ACARS
GNSS receiver Primary

(ARINC 743A) displays
Flight control
LAAS receiver system /
autopilot
GNU
Fig. 3.12 GNU functional structure and its main links
The ARINC 760-1 feature specifically emphasizes that GNU does not provide the
VHF navigation and precision approach functions.
Thus, a GNU that corresponds to the ARINC 760-1 characteristic can qualify as
a unit integrating the functions of the FMS and the GNSS sensor.
3.3.4 Multimode MMR Landing Receiver, Corresponding

to ARINC 755 Characteristic
The primary document defining the functionality of the MMR digital receiver is the
ARINC 755-2 [50] characteristic. It is the basis for other characteristics that include
the functionality of the MMR digital receiver (e.g., the ARINC 756 characteristics)
[51].
The document contains such MMR functionality as a GLS landing. The ARINC
755-2 feature does not include a functional description of the main GNSS navigation.
This function is defined in ARINC 743A, and all other features (e.g., ARINC 755,
756, 760) in this part rely on ARINC 743A. MMR should work on airplanes that
have predominantly ARINC 429 data bus interfaces.
The MMR receiver is considered to be an airborne source of data on deviation
from the flight path in the final phase of approach and landing of the aircraft. Data
can be obtained from any of the ILS, MLS and GLS systems.
The functional structure of the MMR and its main connections are shown in
Fig. 3.13 The dotted line in the figure shows the optional parts (links) of the MMR.
The following functions/applications should be included (or provided) in the
MMR:
• FMS interface/autopilot/instrumentation;
• precision approach function;
• database of precision approach and re-approach;
• GNSS sensor interface;
• GNSS receiver;
• WAAS;
• internal receiver of the VDB differential data transmission line;
• external VDB receiver interface;
• ILS/MLS/GLS deviation switching;
• ILS;
• GLS;
• internal MLS (optional);
• cab interface.
If the landing data is ILS or MLS, the MMR receiver should receive and process
the radio signals from the ILS or MLS antennas and calculate the output of the faults
that are used by external systems.
If the data source is GNSS, the MMR receiver should receive the corrected position
data from the internal GNSS receiver in accordance with ARINC 743A. Reception
VDB can be both internal and external.
The function of the VDB receiver is to receive GLS differential correction data
and route points data (MRP) from the local control and correction station (LCS)
(in the ICAO terminology, the GBAS ground-based functional supplement system).
Differential data is transmitted from the internal VDB receiver to the GLS function,
External VDB
MLS receiver
receiver
Option source
ILS
Glide receiver
FMS
Heading Input / output
device
VDB Autopilot
receiver
Electronic
flight
information
system (EFIS)
GLS
function
IRS
GNSS
receiver Aircraft
personification data
MMR
Fig. 3.13 MMR functional structure and its main connections
where the synthesized landing path and aircraft deviations from it (the so-called ILS
look-alike data) are calculated.
As a VDB receiver, the HF portion of the ILS heading receiver can be used;
however, this use is not required by the ARINC 755-2 feature.
ILS look-alike data generated by the GLS function and based on the correction of
position, velocity and time data must have accuracy and integrity that meets ICAO
requirements.
The MMR receiver does not perform radio navigation functions on VOR and
DME radio beacons, as well as FMS functions.
The VDB receiver included in the MMR must comply with the current versions
of the RTCA DO-253 document (“Minimum Operational Performance Standards for
GPS LAAS Aiborne Equipment”) [52] and the RTCA DO-246 Document (“GNSS
based precision approach LAAS—Signal-in-Space Interface Control Document
(ICD)”) [53], which are based on and in accordance with Chapter 3 of Volume I
of Annex 10 to the ICAO Convention (with amendments 76 and 77) [54].
3.3.5 Advanced Flight Management Computer System

FMCS, Corresponding to the Characteristics
of ARINC702A
The advanced flight management computer system of the aircraft, corresponding to

ARINC 702A, is intended for installation on the new generation of aircraft and is not
intended for retrofit of the aircraft that use equipment other than the equipment of
the ARINC 700 series. Advanced FMCS provides pacxipennye vozmonocti po
cpavneni c ARINC 702 and maintains the expected requirements for operations in
a CNS/ATM environment. FMCS assumes the implementation of navigation based
on the widespread use of GNSS data and RNP requirements, the use of airborne
data link for communication and surveillance, the implementation of control/display
capabilities via the crew interface. The functional requirements for FMCS, as defined
in the ARINC 702A, are applicable to the integrated equipment [21] as a Flight
Management Function.
ARINC 702A does not contain control and display unit (CDU) requirements.
They are defined separately in the ARINC 739 characteristic.
The ARINC 702A feature is part of the advanced navigation equipment family
of features that includes the ARINC 760 (GNU) and the ARINC 756 (GNLU).
The functional characteristics of these three systems are very similar, and therefore,
significant parts of these documents are common.
The ARINC 702A details the requirements for implementing the following FMCS
functions:
• navigation;
• flight planning;
• side and vertical guidance;
• trajectory prediction;
• performance calculations;
• communication of AOC and ATS by DL “air-to-ground”;
• interface with the pilot through the MCDU;
• generation and delivery of data to the electronic indication system (EFIS).
In the ARINC 702A interoperability standards, redundancy and certification
issues, standard interfaces and EFIS interface, self-monitoring and maintenance
services are considered.
Aircraft DME IRS/ Data loader ADS Landing

Chronometer Fuel gauge Barometric
personification #1, #2 altimeter (АRINC 615А) #1, #2 control panel
altimeter
module #1, #2, #3
2 3 2
Navigation To signaling devices

Navigation
function
database
(АRINC 702А) MCDU
GNSS (АRINC 739)
receiver #1, #2
(АRINC 743)
2 АRINC 743А outputs
Precision Input / output

VDB 2
approach device
processor CMU/MU
database GLS
(LAAS) 4 ATC ADS #1, #2
approach
function
(АRINC 755) ADS-B
VOR/ILS
receiver Primary
displays
ILS/VOR Off
function
Glide ILS (АRINC 710/547) Off
receiver Flight control
system /
ILS/MLS/GLS
Off Autopilot
switching
2 MLS receiver MLS
function
GNLU OMS/CFDS
Fig. 3.14 GNLU functional structure and its main links
3.3.6 GNSS Navigation and Landing Unit Corresponding

to ARINC 756
The GNSS navigation and landing unit (GNLU), corresponding to ARINC 756,
combines all the FMS functions on ARINC 702A, the GNSS sensor on ARINC 743A
and MMR on ARINC 755 in one LRU. In the “Navigation Only” configuration,
the device functions as a GNSS navigation device (GNU) and contains some of
the features of a traditional FMS. In the “Landing Only” configuration, the device
functions as a MMR multimode receiver. GNLU functions are fully implemented in
the “Navigation and Landing” configuration.
The functional structure of GNLU and its main links are presented in Fig. 3.14.
3.4 The Composition of the Functional Tasks

of the Modern Integrated Avionics of Navigation,
Landing, Data Exchange and ATC
The above analysis of the current state of existing systems and prospects of navi-
gation, landing, data exchange and ATC systems, as well as ARINC documents
that define the functional tasks of the CNS/ATM avionics, allows us to formulate
proposals on the composition of the functional tasks of the integrated avionics of
navigation, landing, data exchange and ATC.
3.4 The Composition of the Functional Tasks of the Modern … 169
NAVIGATION
GNSS
RSBN
VOR
DME
LANDING
GLS
ILS
MLS
PRMG
RADIO DATA
EXCHANGE
RSBN
datalink
VDB
ATC
RBS(S) ATC
transponder
TCAS II
ADS-B
1090 ES
TAWS
FMCS DATA EXCHANGE

FUNCTIONS WITH ON-BOARD
AIRCRAFT
SYSTEMS
Fig. 3.15 Typical composition of functional tasks of integrated avionics of navigation, landing,
data exchange and air traffic control of promising aircraft
Weather Navigation Radar (WXr) Cockpit Display Cockpit display of traffic

System (CDS) information and crew avoidance
Traction control system (TCS)

Onboard system of
maintenance
(OSM)
Flight control system (FCS)
Onboard data loader

Integrated avionics of
Air data system navigation, landing,
data exchange and ATC Аnalog
(ADS)
HF and VHF
Chronometer transceivers
Inertial reference system (IRS)

or vertical course
(VС)
Control panel of
communication
equipment
Radioaltimeter
(RA)
Аutomatic direction finder Мultipurpose control display

(АDF) unit
(МCDU)
Fig. 3.16 Typical structure of civil aviation aircraft REC with integrated avionics of navigation,
landing, data exchange and ATC (single version)
For prospective aircraft of the Russian Aviation, a typical set of functional tasks
presented in Fig. 3.15 and including almost all significant functional tasks of the
airborne equipment, reflected in the concept of CNS/ATM, can be proposed.
Figure 3.16 shows the typical structure of an aviation REC of a civilian aircraft,
into which the proposed integrated avionics for navigation, landing, data exchange
and ATC has been introduced.
References

radioelektronnogo kompleksa. Radiotekhnika 5:18–22
tronnogo kompleksa. Radiotekhnika. 9:49–54
3. Bochkarev AM, Strukov YuP (1990) Bortovoe radioelektronnoe oborudovanie letatel’nyh
apparatov. Itogi nauki i tekhniki, Aviastroenie.-T.II.-M
4. Turchak A (1999) Arhitektura i osnovnye apparaturno- programmnye moduli kompleksa
aviacionnogo bortovogo oborudovaniya pyatogo pokoleniya. Mir avioniki 6
5. Formirovanie i primenenie integral’nogo radionavigacionnogo po-lya. A.D. Argunov, S.N.
Malyukov, A.D. Matyushenko i dr. Radiotekhnika (1998) 9:31–36
6. Malyukov S.N. Integral’naya radionavigacionnaya sistema. Osnovy i problemy
funkcionirovaniya Sb. dokladov IV Ross. nauch.-tekhn. konf-cii «Sovremennoe sostoy-
anie, problemy navigacii i okeanografii» («NO-2001»), 6–9 iyunya 2001g. Tom 1. SPb.,
2001
7. Rowlett R, Stewart C, Flexible programmable signal processor for next generation fighter air
craft. NAECON’85, pp 22–27
8. Garbonell J (1996) Ostgaard. Impact of COTS on Military Avionics Architectures. AGARD
CP- 581/29 (published 1997)
References 171
9. Koncepciya i sistemy CNS/ATM v grazhdanskoj aviacii. Bochkarev V.V., Kravcov V.F.,

Kryzhanovskij G.A. i dr.; Pod red. G.A. Kryzhanovskogo. M.: IKC «Akademkniga», 2003.
415s
10. «Rukovodstvo po trebuemym navigacionnym harakteristikam (RNP)». Doc.9613- AN/937.
ICAO, 1994
11. Pervaya popravka k Global’nomu aeronavigacionnomu planu primeni-tel’no k sistemam
CNS/ATM: (Doc.9750 ICAO). Monreal’: IKAO, C-WP/11609
12. Sobolev EV (1988) Statisticheskaya korrekciya avtonomnyh ustrojstv oprede-leniya kursa i
mesta vozdushnogo sudna s pomoshch’yu radionavigacionnyh sredstv. Diss. na soisk. uchenoj
stepeni k.t.n. L.: OLAGA
13. Bond L (1998) The Federal Radionavigation Plan and the FAA Air Traffic Control System of
the Future. J ATC
14. ISO/IEC 7498-1 (1994) Information technology. Open Syst Interconnect Basic Ref Model
Rossijskoj Federacii». Utv. Postanovleniem Pravitel’stva RF ot 22.02.2000g. №144
16. Davidson M (1996) Simulering av interfererande Signaler I direktsekvenssystem med
inriktning mot GPS. FOA–R–96–00254 3.6 SE. Sweden
17. «Global’nyj aeronavigacionnyj plan primenitel’no k sistemam CNS/ATM». Doc. 9750 (s
popravkami 11-j aeronavigacionnoj konf. IKAO 22.09.03g.–03.10.03g.)
18. Sovremennye sistemy blizhnej radionavigacii letatel’nyh appara-tov: (Azimutal’no -
dal’nomernye sistemy). T.G. Anodina, YU.A. Ignat’ev, P.V. Olyanyuk i dr.; Pod red. G.A.
Paholkova. M.: Transport 1986
19. Federal Radionavigation System, 2001. Published by Department of Defense and Department
of Transportation USA. 2002
20. Common fitting standards for air communications, navigation, identification and landing
systems for Joint NATO/PfP Operations/EAPC (NATMC – COMNAV) N(99)6. 20 Oct. 1999
21. ARINC 702A-1 «Advanced Flight Management Computer System». January 2000
22. TSO C151a «Terrain awareness and warning system»
23. RTCA/DO-161A «Minimum performance standards—airborne ground proximity warning
equipment»
24. Reshenie o vydache patenta RF na izobretenie po zayavke №2004118456/11 (019974) ot
10.06.2004 g. «Sposob preduprezhdeniya stolknoveniya letatel’nogo apparata s zemlej i
ustrojstvo na ego os-nove .V.I. Baburov, YU.G. Volchok, T.B. Gal’perin i dr
25. Svidetel’stvo №200320148 ot 23 iyulya 2003g
26. Sertifikat sootvetstviya № ROSS RU KR02.00071 ot 30 iyunya 2004g
27. Lopez R (1994) FAA cancels MLS work to concentrate on GPS. Flight Int 145:4424
28. Klass PJ (1994) FAA cancels MLS in favor of GPS. Aviat Week Space Techno 140:24
29. Klass PJ (1994) Europe seeks to fill MLS « GAP » left by US. Aviat Week Space Technol
141:11
30. Daly K, Warwick G (1995) Europe and USA fail to avert showdown over landing aids. Flight
Int 147:4465
31. Mezhdunarodnye standarty i rekomenduemaya praktika. Aviacionnaya elektrosvyaz’.
Prilozhenie 10 k Konvencii o mezhdunarodnoj grazhdan-skoj aviacii. T.I.Radionavigacionnye
sredstva. Izd.5-e. IKAO 1996
32. Lawson JC Review and update of navigation aid protection dates. In: ICAO NSP WGW-WP/17.
Working group of the whole meeting, St Petersburg, Russia, 25 May–4 June 2004
Prilozhenie 10 k Konvencii o mezhdunarodnoj grazhdan-skoj aviacii. T.III, ch.I.Sistemy
peredachi cifrovyh dannyh. Izd.1-e. IKAO, 1995 (s uchetom popravki 76 ot 01.11.01 g.)
34. RTCA/DO-224A «Signal-in-Space Minimum Aviation System Performance Standards
(MASPS) for Advanced VHF Digital Data Communications including Compatibility with
Digital Voice Techniques»
35. Manual on detailed technical specification for the VDL mode 4 digital link. Draft, 11.03.02
36. Avtomaticheskoe zavisimoe nablyudenie – radioveshchatel’noe na baze linii peredachi dannyh

rezhima 4. – M., Gos NII «Aeronavigaciya», Gos NII AS, 1998
37. «Rukovodstvo po seti aviacionnoj elektrosvyazi (ATN)». Doc/9578-AN/935. Izd.1-e Monreal’,
IKAO. 1991
38. Aviacionnaya radiolokaciya: Spravochnik. P.S. Davydov, A.A. Sosnovskij, I.A. Hajmovich.
M.: Transport, 1984. 223s
Prilozhenie 10 k Konvencii o mezhdunarodnoj grazhdan-skoj aviacii. T.IV. Sistemy obzornoj
radiolokacii i preduprezhde-niya stolknovenij. Izd.2-e. IKAO 1998
40. GOST 21800-89 «Sistemy vtorichnoj radiolokacii dlya upravleniya vozdushnym dvizheniem.
Obshchie tekhnicheskie trebovaniya»
41. Aviacionnaya radionavigaciya: Spravochnik A.A. Sosnovskij, I.A. Hajmovich, E.A. Lutin, I.B.
Maksimov; Pod red. A.A. Sosnovskogo. M.: Transport, 1990
42. ARINC 768-2 (2011) «Integrated surveillance system (ISS)», June
43. Baburov VI, Ponomarenko BV (2004) Bortovoe aviacionnoe integrirovan-noe oborudovanie
nablyudeniya i preduprezhdeniya blizosti zemli /Mat-ly VII mezhd. konf-cii «Aktual’nye
problemy elektronnogo priboro-stroeniya» APEP-2004. T.4. Novosibirsk, pp 170–176
44. ARINC 660 (1995) «CNS/ATM Avionics, Functional Allocation and Recommended Archi-
tectures», December
45. Adams C (2005) Military/civil interoperability. Avion Mag, pp 26–31
46. Frain S, Van Sicle G CNS/ATM for tactical military aircraft. In: 9th Saint Peters-burg
international conference on integrated navigation systems—Russia, 27–29 May 2002
47. Hughes D (1998) Civil avionics move into military arena. Aviat Week Space Technol 9:68, 69
48. ARINC 660A (2001) «CNS/ATM Avionics, Functional Allocation and Recommend-ed
Architec- tures», January
49. ARINC 760-1 (2002) «GNSS Navigation Unit (GNU)», March
50. ARINC 755-2 (2001) «Multi-Mode Receiver (MMR) - Digital», January
51. ARINC 756-2 (2000) «GNSS Navigation and Landing Unit (GNLU)», February
52. RTCA/DO-253A «Minimum operational performance standards for GPS local area augmen-
tation system airborne equipment»
53. RTCA/DO-246B «GNSS based precision approach local area augmentation system (LAAS)—
signal-in-space interface control document (ICD)»
54. Popravki 76 i 77 k t.I Radionavigacionnye sredstva //Mezhdunarodnye standarty i rekomendue-
maya praktika. Aviacionnaya elektrosvyaz’. Pri-lozhenie 10 k Konvencii o mezhdunarodnoj
grazhdanskoj aviacii. IKAO, 2001–2002g.g
Chapter 4
Principles of Integration of Airborne
Radio-Electronic Equipment
4.1 Airborne Radio-Electronic Equipment as a Distributed

Information Processing System
The development of airborne avionics is following the path of increasingly

widespread use of microprocessor-based computing equipment embedded in the
airborne equipment and allowing the use of digital signal and data processing tech-
niques. The presence on board the aircraft of numerous radio systems equipment
(see Chap. 3) using microprocessors leads to the need to generalize and formalize
the principles of its construction as a distributed computing system (DCS) or, more
broadly, a distributed information processing system (DIPS).
For computing tools developed and used in recent decades, the transition from
centralized information processing in a single computing unit (CU) to distributed
information processing in computing systems is characteristic [1–6] and others].
The concept of a computer system has a more detailed classification:
(1) computing system—a system consisting of computing machines or processors
with memory [7–11];
(2) computational structure—a system consisting of functional modules with the
possibility of hardware and software settings for the implemented function
[12–15];
(3) computing environment—a system consisting of the simplest (hereinafter not
simplified) universal automata with automaton and connecting completeness
and tuning software and hardware to implement logical functions, memory and
connecting functions [16–18].
The theory of distributed information processing and distributed computing
systems was first developed in the 1960s by Soviet scientists at the Institute of
Mathematics of the Siberian Branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences [19, 20] and
described, in particular, in [7, 9, 10, 16, 21]. The publication of the first monographs
[8, 9] and collections of papers [22] on computing systems and environments attracted
174 4 Principles of Integration of Airborne Radio-Electronic Equipment
the attention of many experts to the development of problems of distributed informa-

tion processing. The peak of publications and the creation of experimental samples
of the DCS abroad falls on the 70s–80s of the last century, which is reflected, in
particular, in [5, 6]. Theoretical and experimental studies in this area have shown the
fundamental possibility of creating high-performance and reliable DCS. However,
the practical implementation of the DCS became possible with the advent of mass
computing equipment based on microprocessors and cheap and reliable memory and
display devices.
A significant number of definitions of distributed information processing and DCS
classifications are proposed. There is an opinion that “the richness of the topic does
not allow one to accurately determine distributed information processing without
prejudice to anyone’s interests” [6].
According to Eckhaus, distributed information processing is a “set of processing
elements that are connected logically and physically decentralized resource manage-
ment with the goal of joint execution of application programs” [cit. by 5]. Here, a
logical connection (channel) is a path that serves for the interaction of two programs
or processes that are executed in different computers of a distributed system, which
differs from the physical connection realized by electrical circuits, connectors and
cables.
Eckhaus’s definition, generally speaking, does not apply to multiprocessor or
tightly coupled systems in which processors are connected through shared memory.
In contrast, loosely coupled processors or computers have hardware communication
interfaces, but they may not have the ability to decentralize resource management.
In the latter case, the DCS consists of the main (host) and local computers. All tasks
are sent to the system through the host computer. There are systems in which the
interaction between computers is reduced to the irregular exchange of data between
them, and the computers in them are completely independent. In such systems, there
is no mainframe computer, and they are called completely distributed.
In [5], the term “distributed” is interpreted more “freely”, and all the listed systems
refer to distributed. Further, we will use a rather broad definition of DCS, given by
E.V. Evreinov in the preface to [6]: “A distributed computing system is a set of
parallel computing devices that are integrated into a single whole with the help of
software and hardware tools.”
The theoretical basis for the development of RVS was the model of a collective
of computers. This model was proposed in the 1960s by Evreinov [7, 9, 17, 18] and
developed in his works [23, 24], as well as other scientists [12–15, 25].
The author came to the concept of a collective of computers by analyzing collective
human activity. The principal qualities of a human collective working on one common
task (having one common goal) are as follows:
(1) parallel decision by members of the collective of their parts of a common task;
(2) the interaction of collective members when solving a common problem
(exchange of information and products of activities);
4.1 Airborne Radio-Electronic Equipment as a Distributed … 175
(3) the possibility of restructuring the collective. Many tasks of different nature can
be solved by the same collective after restructuring its structure and retraining
(internal restructuring) of collective members;
(4) the vitality of the collective. The collective continues, as a rule, to function
with a decrease in its number, but, perhaps, with reduced capabilities [18].
Under the model of the collective of computers is understood the set of inter-
connected and parallel functioning computers, which is able to tune in to solve a
common problem. The basis of the model of the collective of computers consists of
three principles:
• parallelism (concurrency) of operations;
• variability or programmability of the structure;
• constructive uniformity.
Parallel operation of computers is a fundamental principle for ensuring unlimited
growth of productivity in solving complex problems. The principle of parallelism
characterizes the method of performing operations in the model of a collective of
computers. At the same time, the structure of exchange interactions is not affected,
without which there is no possibility to solve a complex task, since in this case,
instead of a collection, a set of separate computers is not connected. Consequently,
the latitude of the class of tasks and the efficiency of the collective of computers
depend on the way information is organized.
The principle of variability is also a fundamental principle of complex systems.
Without it, adaptation of the system to the environment and survivability (preser-
vation of the system as a whole) under the adverse effects of this environment is
impossible. The principle of variability (the possibility of reconfiguration–reorgani-
zation of the structure) ensures the survivability of the collective in case of refusals
from individual computers. In the collective of computers, the possibility of “storing”
its structure and program reconfiguration should be laid. In addition to survivability,
the principle of variability ensures the scalability of the system by including new
elements, since by changing the connections it is possible to ensure that the system
with new elements preserves integrity.
The principle of uniformity as applied to a collective of computations means their
constructive uniformity. The introduction of this principle is justified by the reduction
in the cost of computing resources in the mass production of computers included in
the computing system.
The theory of the collective of computers is described in sufficient detail in [7, 9,
18, 24], and therefore, in this section, we will give only the terms, definitions and
properties of the collective of computers that are further needed to develop a model
describing integrated avionics.
The model of the computer is conceptually described by the pair <c, A>, where c—
is the computer itself, A is the algorithm of the computer’s operation. The algorithm
of the computer is represented by the superposition A(P(D)), where D is the initial
data, P is the computation program. The algorithm can be described in terms of
any of the known algorithmic systems: post, turing machines, recursive functions
and normal algorithms. All algorithmic systems are equivalent. Thus, the computer
model has the property of algorithmic universality.
The model of the collective of computers is the pair <C, A>, where C =
{c1 , c2 , . . . , c N } is the set of connected computers ci ; A is the algorithm of the collec-
tive as a whole. The latter is a superposition A(P()), where P is aN parallel program
N
of computations (solving a general problem); = i=1 Pi , i=1 Pi = ∅, Pi —
ith branch of the program; —the initial data array for the parallel N program;
N
= i=1 Di , Di is an individual data array for ci , and in general i=1 Di = ∅. In
equivalent form, the algorithm A is a composition

A 1 ∗ A 1 ∗ . . . ∗ Ai ∗ Ai ∗ . . . ∗ A N ∗ A N ,

where Ai ∗ Ai defines the behavior of the computer ci among other computers of

the set C; Ai , Ai —respectively, the algorithm of individual work ci and the algorithm
of realization of interactions
ci with other computers. Algorithm Ai is a superpo-

sition of Ai Pi (G) , in which Pi is a program for establishing connections and
performing interactions between the computer ci and other collective computers, G
is the description of the communication subnetwork computers.
Different ways of implementing the set of algorithms {Ai }, choosing the structure
of the subnet G, specifying the {Pi }, lead to a variety of technical implementations
of the computers collective model. The hardware tools with which the set of algo-
rithms {Ai } is implemented together with the communication subnet G make up the
environment for the interaction of computers. Until structure G is given, there is no
collective of computers. Setting the structure of the communication subnetwork actu-
ally sets all possible structural schemes or configurations (profile) that are necessary
for solving specific tasks. The specific state of the communication subnet sets the
data path from one computer to another and thus fixes a specific structure (config-
uration) of the computer collective to solve a specific task. This is the fundamental
difference between the model of the collective of computers and the model of the
computer, which has one fixed structure when solving any problems.
When implementing the principle of uniformity in the model of a collective of
computers, there is no special computer that would always control the computational
process, and any designated computer can play its role. In this connection, in order
to ensure collectivework, each computer is supplemented by means of specifying
channel switching, exchanging information between computers, synchronizing and
managing computation processes. These tools are called the system unit [23] or the
system interface (SI) [25], and the combination of the computer and the SI is called
the elementary machine (EM).
The topological structure of the collective of computers is given in Fig. 4.1.
There are three classes of models of the collective of computers: distributed,
concentrated and microcomputation. A distributed model of a collective of computers
is called such a model, in which the execution time of a standard calculation t0 is less
than the transmission time of a standard message τ from one computer to another
(t0 < τ ). The concentrated model of the collective of computers is the one for which
Communication subnetwork G
SI 1 EМ 2 EМ N
Computer 1
ЭМ 1
Fig. 4.1 Topological structure of the collective of computers
t0 > τ . As part of the EM, both models and other models can have computers
of varying degrees of complexity: maximal—in the form of a computing system,
intermediate—in the form of a universal computer with external memory devices,
input–output devices and minimal—in the form of a processor and RAM.
Computational tools implemented in accordance with the first or second of the
models of the collective of computers are called computing systems (CS). Accord-
ingly, there are distinguished and concentrated computing systems. For those and
others, the theory and engineering methods of analysis and design were developed
in detail.
The microcomputation model of the collective of computers consists of
computers, which are the simplest universal automata that have automaton and
coupling completeness and are tuned to implement functions from the complete set of
functions: logical, memory and connective. Computational tools implemented by this
model are called computing environments [7]. Vivid examples of computing envi-
ronments are systolic matrices [26], programmable logic integrated circuits with the
EPLD architecture (repeatedly programmable) and FPGA (multiple reconfigurable)
by XILINX, ALTERA and others [27].
Let us dwell in more detail on computing systems, since airborne aviation
computing facilities can in most cases be attributed specifically to computing systems.
There is a wide variety of classifications of computing systems, often contra-
dictory, but allowing them to be used in practical applications. The main ones are
the Flynn classification [28], Shor’s classification scheme [29] and the Erlangen
classification [30].
Five characteristics were selected in the Flynn classification:
• type of command stream—single (SC) or multiple (MC);
• type of data stream—single (SD) or multiple (MD);
• data processing method—word by word (W) or bitwise (B);
Fig. 4.2 Main types of OCS

computing systems
according to the Flynn
classification SCMD МCSD МCМD
ОКМД
OCS маtrix OCS pipeline OCS мultiprocessor
OCS мulticomputer
• degree of connectivity of functional elements of the computing system—low (LC)

or high (HC);
• type of communication between elements of the system: communication through
a channel-to-channel adapter (CC), communication via a shared storage device
(SS), direct communication between processors (CPP), communication via a
common bus with time division (CB), communication through many buses (CTB),
communication with a switch (CWS).
An example of the designation of CS according to the Flynn classification:
MCMDWS/HCCB is a computer system with multiple instruction flow, multiple data
flow, with word processing of data, with a high degree of connectivity of functional
elements, provided by the common bus connection.
The main types of the most commonly used OCS, classified according to the
Flynn scheme [31], are presented in Fig. 4.2.
The classification of the Shor is based on the use of two signs:
• method of connecting the main components of the computing system—control
units (CU), data processing units (DP), command memory (CM) and data memory
(DM);
• data processing method—word by word (W) or bitwise (B).
A schematic representation of the six classes of OCS according to Shor [31] is
presented in Fig. 4.3. Type IV shows that all the processor elements (CU + DP)
operate independently and synchronously under the control of a single CU. Type V
is a type IV with additional equipment that provides connections for each processor
element with its closest neighboring elements. Type VI is a computing system based
on the use of the principle of distribution of the DP logic throughout the storage
system (associative memory (AM)).
The Erlangen classification scheme uses the so-called Erlangen triplet t = (k,
d, w) for describing a separate simple computer, where k is the number of CUs;
d is the number of DPs controlled by one of the control devices; w is the length
of a machine word or the number of digits processed by each of the DP. For the
classification of complex computers, extended triplets are created using the logical
connectives “+” (sum), “*” (production) and “∨” (disjunction). For example, a von
Neumann type computer is characterized by a triple “1, 1, w”. A computer consisting
of m control units with an r-level command pipeline, m processing devices that
I II III
CM CM CM
CU CU DP(B) CU DP(B)
DP(W) DM
DM DP(W) DM
IV V VI
CM CM CM
CU CU CU
DP DP DP DP DP DP АM
DM DM … DM DM DM … DM
Fig. 4.3 Main types of computing systems according to Shor’s classification
form a macropipeline, each DP having an l-level arithmetic pipeline is denoted t =

(1 ∗ m, 1 ∗ r, 1 ∗ l) or, more simply, (∗m, ∗r, ∗l).
For computing systems, three-plethes compositions are used. For example, a
system consisting of a 32-bit control machine with a four-level instruction pipeline
and two others with a conventional von Neumann structure with 16- and 32-bit DPs
is described as follows: t = (1, ∗4, 32) ∗ [(1, 1, 16) + (1, 1, 32)].
The considered Erlangen classification scheme has one significant drawback:
It lacks the means of mapping the connections between the computer’s system
computers.
One of the most common classifications of connections, related mainly to multi-
processor and multicomputers systems (such as MCMDW), is shown in Fig. 4.4 [31,
32]. This classification distinguishes fixed connections between computers by the
following features:
• information connection organization strategy—direct or indirect;
• method of controlling the routing of information transfer—lack of control,
centralized or decentralized control;
• type of connections—individual or shared (common);
• the way of realizing the connections.
In the case of direct transmission, the information transmitter (data transmitter)
selects the path, and the receiver (data receiver) recognizes messages destined for it.
In the case of indirect transmission between the transmitter and receiver of informa-
tion, the logic of choosing one of several alternative paths and sometimes additional
information converters is provided.
Information
connection
Direct Indirect
connection connection
Lack of control Centralized control Decentralized control

of routing of routing of routing
Individual Shared line Individual Shared line Individual Shared line

line line line
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 C12
Connection option
Fig. 4.4 Classification of communications in multicomputer and multiprocessor computing

systems
Direct transmission does not require management of information transfer paths.

Indirect transmission with centralized control is characterized by the presence of a
single element of the computational system (switch or computer) through which all
messages are transmitted. With decentralized management, one of several elements
of the system is selected as an intermediate point for the transfer of messages.
An individual bus (bus) connection connects one transmitter to one receiver. For
common buses (common bus), gear is carried out in time division multiplexing
(TDM) mode. The latter include, for example, multiplexed communication lines
(multiplexed bus) used in aviation, conforming to standards MIL-STD-1553B or
STANAG 3910.
The types of connections most commonly used in computing systems are
presented in Fig. 4.5 [31, 32] (their designations ci correspond to Fig. 4.4). We
emphasize once again that the presented structures describe the fixed connections
between the computers, and thus, the corresponding computing systems are the worst
or best approximation to the collective of computers, because they do not implement
the principle of variability (programmability) of the structure. At the same time,
studying the properties of such systems [32] provides information for the devel-
oper of a collective of computers about the properties of various configurations of
computing systems (distribution, scalability, survivability, fault tolerance, etc.).
In [18], it was shown that the model of a collective of computers has struc-
tural universality, which is expressed in the fact that any model of a computing tool
consisting of several identical computers is equivalent to the model of a number of
computers. The upper limit (by complexity) of the computer collective model is a
С1 С2 С3 С4
Memory
С5 С6 С7 С8
С9 С10 С11 С12
- computer - commutator
Fig. 4.5 Types of connections most commonly used in computing systems
uniform computing system, and the lower one is a homogeneous computing environ-
ment. Inter-exact space between computing systems and environments is occupied
by uniform computing structures. All possible types of newly proposed uniform
computing structures are enclosed between these boundaries.
As examples confirming this point at the time of writing the book [18], the author
cites multifunctional regular computational structures [15], homogeneous digital
modeling structures [13], homogeneous tunable structures [17], combined computers
structures [33], recursive computing structures [34], universal uniform computing
structures in which an integrated microcircuit is used as an EM.
The past years have confirmed the universality of the model of a collective of
computers, repeatedly increasing the number of examples of its use. We indicate
only some of them.
(1) Improving the microprocessor architecture. The architecture of microproces-
sors that have become the basis of computing technology over the past decades
is constantly being improved in the direction of moving away from the sequen-
tial execution of commands—increasing parallelism within the computer,
i.e., creating single-crystal computing systems from microcomputers. These
innovations include
constantly improved conveyor processing;

separated microprocessor architecture (two or more connected subproces-
sors controlled by a stream of commands; an example is the Pentium II
universal microprocessor of Intel);
superscalar architecture [35], examples of which are universal micropro-
cessors Pentium, Pentium MMX f. Intel, K5 and K6 f. AMD, Alpha 2106x,
Alpha 21164, Alpha 21264 f. DEC, R10000 f. Mips;
processors with a long command word (VLIW architecture); an example is
the processor 6000 of the Texas Instruments;
processors with multiscalar architecture [36].
(2) Creation of signal microprocessors with an architecture that provides the imple-
mentation of CS with a parallel programming architecture. Such micropro-
cessors include transputers and transputer-like microprocessors TMS320C40
f.Texas Instruments and ADSP 2106x, ADSP 2116 × f.Analog Devices.
(3) Creation of signal microprocessors for processing video images, graphic
applications, etc. (e.g., TMS320C80 f.Texas Instruments).
(4) Creation of local and global computer networks (Internet), which are a set of
computers remote from each other, sometimes over very long distances and
connected by a subnetwork of communications. The computer network uses the
simplest form of a model of a collective of computers, providing only pairwise
interactions of computers and therefore is able to solve only independent sets
of problems with the exchange of their results.
Consider, from the point of view of the DCS, the structure of modern avionics.
Analysis of the schemes of the numerous types of operated single-functional avionics
for navigation, landing, communications, data exchange and ATC makes it possible
to identify common functions for them and present a modern avionics in the form
a generalized structure (Fig. 4.6) [37] with feeders and antenna switch, components
of antenna-feeder unit (AFU), receiving (R) and transmitting (T) devices, as well as
measuring and computing subsystem (MCS) consisting of DSP, DP, signal shaping
processors (SSP) and input/output processors (IOP).
Single- Single-
functional functional
R DSP
DP IOP
Single- Single-
functional functional
T SSP
Fig. 4.6 Topological structure of single-functional avionics

In the avionics of a number of radio navigation systems, the antenna switch and
transmitter may be missing. The separation of functions between the DSP and DP
basically corresponds to the separation of signal processing into the primary and
secondary.
The functions of each of the devices included in this structure depend on the
type of radio system and the avionics generation. For example, in the avionics of
the first generation RSBN, signal generation was carried out at the transmitter, and
signal processing was divided between the receiver and electromechanical units for
measuring the azimuth and range. The output signals of these blocks were issued
with the help of selsyns to the navigation computing device, which is not part of
the airborne equipment RSBN. Thus, the DSP functions were divided, the DP was
absent, and the IOP was included in the DSP.
In the generalized block diagram of avionics of digital data exchange [38], the
DSP performs the functions of a demodulator and decoding device (decoder), DP—
message reproducing device, realizing the functions of the channel level and the
subnet level, the SSP—the device generating the message, the coding device (coder)
and modulator.
The following types of information processing can be distinguished in the
presented generalized avionics structure:
(1) signal conversion—changing the non-informative signal parameters and
extracting (selecting) the signal against noise and interference without
changing its structure (conversion of the signal carrier frequency, gain,
bandpass frequency filtering);
(2) signal processing—extracting information from a signal by changing its
structure (demodulation, decoding, descrambling, deinterleaving, searching,
detecting, evaluating signal parameters);
(3) signal shaping—the change in the parameters of the carrier signal (interme-
diate) frequency in accordance with the input data of the driver (modulation,
coding, scrambling and interleaving);
(4) data processing—a transformation in which the output stream of digital infor-
mation is the result of a change in the final number of input streams of digital
information without changing its form (any operations of a digital computer);
(5) signal or data input/output—the conversion of signals or data to another form
for the purpose of receiving/transmitting via intersystem analog or digital
communication lines (transformations corresponding to line-to-line protocols).
The distribution of these functions by avionics devices is given in Table 4.1.
The definitions introduced allow us to represent the structure of the avionics as
an aggregate of several information processing units that interact with each other to
solve a functional problem.
Already one-functional avionics can be qualified as a distributed information
processing system. This applies even more to the interconnected different types of
avionics and integrated avionics.
By analogy with the above definition of DCS, it is possible to define the DIPS.
A distributed information processing system is a set of concurrently operating
Table 4.1 Typical functions of single-function avionics devices for navigation, landing,
communication, data exchange and ATC
Unit function Type of information Unit
processing
Fields to electrical signals Signal conversion Antenna-feeder unit
conversion
Spatial signal selection Signal conversion Antenna-feeder unit
Polarization signal selection Signal conversion Antenna-feeder unit
Signal preamplification Signal conversion Antenna-feeder unit (active
antenna)
Preliminary frequency selection Signal conversion Antenna-feeder unit (active
of signals antenna)
Signal amplification Signal conversion Receiver
Signal frequency conversion Signal conversion Receiver
Frequency signal selection Signal processing Receiver
Signal rationing Signal processing Receiver
Automatic gain control Control Receiver
Automatic frequency tuning Control Receiver
Message formation Data processing SSP
Encoding messages (signals) Signal forming SSP
Signal scrambling and Signal forming SSP
interleaving
Signal modulation Signal forming SSP
Signal power amplification Signal conversion Transmitter
Signal demodulation Signal processing DSP
Descrambling and Signal processing DSP
deinterleaving signals
Decoding messages (signals) Signal processing DSP
Signal search and detection Signal processing DSP
Synchronization Signal processing DSP
Assessment of informative Signal processing DSP
parameters
Antenna-feeder device control Control DSP
Calculation of navigation Data processing DP
parameters (formation of
navigation data)
Entering and storing a flight Data processing DP
program
Trajectory formation Data processing DP
Navigation data filtering Data processing DP
Complex navigation data Data processing DP
processing
(continued)

Unit function Type of information Unit
processing
Message processing Data processing DP
Data link and subnet layer Data processing and DSP on DP
functions control
Receiver and transmitter Control DP + IOP
settings control
Equipment control Control DP + IOP
Input and output of signals or Signals/data input/output IOP
data
information processing units (IPU), integrated into a single whole with the help of
software and hardware.
Due to a fairly large generality, this definition is very poor in content. However, it
allows considering the properties of systems in which not only computing devices,
but also other information processing devices are combined.
Consider some common properties of modern airborne electronic equipment as
DIPS, by analogy with the properties of DCS. In the abstract representation, it consists
of the following elements:
(1) Hardware. These include the AFU, receiving and transmitting units, analog and
digital logic integrated circuits, processors, memory, communication devices,
etc. This set of hardware means can be distributed and combined in different
ways in order to form different structures of physical systems.
(2) Signals and data. A set of analog and discrete signals, sets of digital data,
records in the memory, with the help of which a set of information objects
formed and modified by system operators is formed. Theoretically, there is no
limit to the variety of definitions, options for interaction, dispersal and associ-
ation of data structures within the framework of natural constraints, which are
imposed by the choice of functional tasks of avionics (see p. 2.3).
(3) Application operators. A set of operations or processes, defined as physical
active and passive electrical radio elements, as well as programs, which reflect
the logic of applications.
(4) System operators. A set of operations or processes performed by hard-
ware that are not developed by the avionics development organization and
are supplied as components (operating systems, utilities, standard reusable
programs, firmware of configuration ROMs and peripherals microprocessor
facilities, etc.).
The main feature of the DIPS is that its various elements can be divided into sepa-
rate parts and placed in different logical zones interconnected using the appropriate
protocols. The concept of a logical zone is important. Here, it is meant that separate
elements of DIPS need not be separated by a large distance. A logical zone is under-
stood as an abstract area of the system structure, containing a strictly defined separate
part of both the data itself and the data processing procedure, which interacts with
other zones in such a way that it is not necessary to resolve the issue of its physical
location at the level of the conceptual construction of the system. In particular, when
designing computers, the concept of conceptual construction is defined, as a rule, by
the terms “abstract machine, virtual machine”. The basic idea is that the design of
the logical structures of the systems can be done in some respect, regardless of the
design of the physical structures, and that the physical placement of the hardware
means is carried out in accordance with the arrangement of the logical elements of
the system.
This concept allows realizing a significant number of system varieties, the struc-
ture of which is determined by the methods of system separation, the distance between
the zones where the individual parts of the system are concentrated and the protocols
used to exchange data between them.
From consideration of the differences between the physical and logical structures
of the system, it follows that the construction of logical structures is determined by
the requirements for processing signals and data. These requirements are satisfied
by the logical definition of the system. The physical implementation is determined
by the level of technology achieved for a given period of time. Thus, we define
the logical structure of the system, and after that, we choose acceptable physical
structures in accordance with technological limitations.
To describe the general concept, it is useful to present several characteristics of
the DIPS [6]. In general, for distributed systems is characteristic:
• multiplicity of information processing units;
• integrity (unity) of the system;
• electrical connectivity of the system;
• high level of interaction between elements of the system;
• multiple design options.
The multiplicity of information processing devices is expressed in the fact that
the system contains more than one IPU. Not any such system will be a distributed
information processing system. Functional significance (completeness) of incoming
IPU is needed. There are no clear criteria, and significance is understood intuitively.
The concept of completeness of the system is closely connected with the concept
of functional significance. Completeness is characterized by the degree of sharing of
the main elements of the system, in which the user still retains the impression that
several separate systems are used.
The development of the idea that it is not enough for the DIPS to have a lot
of IPU, leads to the fact that this characteristic of the DIPS is not necessary. An
exact correspondence between the logical concept of the system and its physical
implementation may not be observed. For example, multiprocessor unit in the form
of a set of virtual machines can be implemented using a single-processor unit. With
such a possibility, multiprocessor unit is understood as logical multiprocessor unit.
By virtual is meant a specialized machine that provides complete control of the
logic computer and the execution of its programs. Interfaces are designed in such
a way that the user cannot determine whether his logic system is part of a larger
system, a system with resource sharing, or is an exact reflection of a particular
physical machine. In addition, a virtual machine can be transferred from one physical
machine to another.
The integrity of the system includes two aspects—transparency and
interdependence. Some developers believe that an important characteristic is that
the set of system elements is perceived by the user as a single system, i.e., the user
does not feel the physical structure of the system, the distribution of data or programs.
In the limiting development, this provision means that the user, when approaching
a given system node, will call all resources and data located in other nodes of the
system, as if the data and resources were located in that node.
To enhance the impression of a unified system, the concept of the latter is some-
times suggested to be extended to an application program in such a way that it will
be executed regardless of whether its operators belong to this node or are located
in another node of the system. The operating system must perform the necessary
actions to determine the location of objects and ensure access to them.
The system building strategy, when the user does not feel the presence of a set
of nodes, has several important advantages. Interface uniformity allows the user to
access not necessarily a single node. Necessary data reorganization and a set of
programs from node to node are carried out at a relatively low level of costs. The
required load distribution in a system with many nodes is easier to perform if users
do not fix their attention on those nodes in which this occurs.
There are as follows:
homogeneous transparency (uniformity), when all nodes are the same (hardware,
operating systems, application interfaces). The most important is the uniformity of
the logic of work (software). The connection of homogeneous systems in itself does
not guarantee strictly the adherence to the concept of a unified system. The link of
nodes can be such that the user knows about the existence of individual nodes;
non-uniform transparency (different hardware architecture and different logic of
the operation of some IPU). The problem of implementing a heterogeneous system
is reduced to providing identical user interfaces and/or the same logic (application
program) in all nodes of the system. To fulfill this condition, it is necessary to form
a new interface level, which is located, as it were, over the existing logical struc-
tures (software) of the nodes. At this level it will be formed new, uniform for the
whole system user interfaces and the transformation of these interfaces into the
corresponding local interfaces required for each heterogeneous system node will be
provided. This solution was used in the ARINC 651 concept, where an interface
corresponding to ARINC 659 is used to connect non-uniform system modules;
incomplete transparency, when the integrity of the system from disparate nodes
is provided by system software;
opacity. In some cases, in order to provide connections between heterogeneous
nodes, it is necessary to abandon masking the existence of these nodes. Thus,
transparency is not a mandatory feature of the DIPS.
Interdependence—the ability to influence the functioning of one node on the
functioning of another. The degree of approximation of the set of IPUs to the integral
system is determined by the intensity of their interaction, which can be either random,
observed from time to time, or intense interaction at each time point. Apparently, a
set of interacting nodes can be considered a system if it solves a single-functional
problem.
Connectivity of the system—the presence of electrical connections between
elements of the system. This should also include radio and optical communication.
The multiplicity of design options. DIPS s can be designed using the “top-to-
down” method or the “bottom-to-up” method.
When designing from “top-to-bottom”, the system is considered as a whole. This
method is convenient when the system is intended for a single application or a set
of close applications or when the nodes interact with each other and each of them
performs a certain part in the process of solving one common problem. Each node of
the system is assigned to perform several tasks, and the design of data streams and
control signals, as well as the general planning of the system and application objects,
is carried out in the same way as in the case of developing non-distributed systems
[39].
The “bottom-to-up” design method is used in the formation of DIPS using connec-
tions between nodes that were previously autonomous IPU. This method is best used
in cases where a set of independent applications is solved independently. The advan-
tage of the method is that the possibility of further expansion of the set of solved
applied problems remains. Using the method provides a high degree of local control.
On board the aircraft, many types of single-functional avionics are operated,
weakly connected with each other, and together they constitute a certain cooperative
DIPS, which solves the general functional tasks of the flight-navigation complex.
Therefore, the improvement of this system involves the use of a “bottom-to-up”
design method.
A number of authors, when discussing the problems of integrating radio-technical
avionics, propose the creation of a system with centralized signal and data processing
resources that are used on board the aircraft to solve flight control problems,
processing radar information, weapons control, etc. [40, 41]. Arguments in favor
of integrating avionics of navigation, landing, data exchange and ATC within the
FNC were given in Chap. 1. It is also advisable to discuss the problem from the
point of view of the following dilemma: whether to preserve the distributed nature
of information processing or to use centralized computing resources FNC?
In the literature, the advantages and disadvantages of distributed information
processing compared to centralized information have been repeatedly discussed.
The advantages of distributed processing are as follows [6]:
(1) Increased reliability and fault tolerance. Distributed information processing can
provide greater reliability due to the economical redundancy of critical system
nodes. When using a multi-machine structure, it is possible to propose a variety
of backup and localization schemes for regions sensitive to failures. The same
approach cannot be successfully applied to large centralized computing nodes
of the system, since the cost of such nodes is high and the increment of the
cost of the entire system when it is duplicated is large.
(2) Increased vitality. The structure of DIPS can provide work with gradual
degradation in case of failure of its individual parts due to intact working
parts.
(3) Extensibility (scalability, scalability) with the need to improve performance and
expand functional tasks. DIPSs are easier and cheaper to expand compared to
centralized systems, which, when the performance limits are reached, should,
as a rule, be replaced by new ones. In a distributed system, real-time opera-
tions are carried out near signal sources with a smaller focus on centralizing
computations. Due to this, it is easier and cheaper to add new tasks. The main
limitations associated with the use of hardware, due to the connection between
nodes DIPS.
(4) Increased modularity. The functional and constructive completeness of the
DIPS nodes allows it to be manufactured in the form of a modular structure,
which, in turn, provides flexibility when changing the DIPS and reduces main-
tenance costs. The modularity of the DIPS structure facilitates its “fitting” into
the structure of the highest level system, in this case, in the FNC. The benefits
of avionics modularity are described in detail in ARINC 651.
(5) Improved user interfaces. The user interface can be implemented by allocating
individual nodes of the system for individual applications in such a way that
it reduces the likelihood of contests when accessing resources compared to a
centralized system with intensive separation of resources.
6) Facilitate the use of specialized nodes. The possibility of including highly
specialized nodes is provided if there are means of communication with other
nodes in them and does not require significant modernization of the system
design and software.
Among the disadvantages of the DIPS compared with the centralized system are
the following [6]:
(1) increased software complexity;
(2) the increased complexity of testing and diagnosing failures;
(3) great dependence on connection technology between nodes. When choosing
a communication network, it is necessary to predict the possible evolution of
the system.
Thus, distributed information processing has significant advantages compared to
centralized, and the new avionics should be developed on the basis of the DIPS princi-
ples. This approach has become generally recognized among professionals involved
in the architecture of modern airborne equipment [42–48]. The DIPS principle is
also adopted in the IMA concept, developed in ARINC 651. The DIPS deficiencies
in the development of avionics can be minimized by defining development goals,
choosing a method for distributing information processing and increasing the degree
of functional, structural and technological uniformity system.
4.2 Multi-level Models of Integrated Avionics
The initial stage of creating an integrated avionics includes consideration of three

main aspects:
(1) Why is it necessary to integrate avionics? What advantages will be provided due
to the integration of system elements in terms of cost, reliability, availability,
serviceability, etc.?
(2) How should the integration of system elements be performed? What are the
limitations of integration, problems associated with the design of the system,
the possibilities arising from the various integration options?
(3) On the basis of what hardware and software can the most preferred integration
options be implemented?
Decisions that are made when choosing a construction option for such a complex
system as integrated avionics can be represented by a family of models, each of
which describes the properties of the system at a different level of abstraction. To do
this, we use the terms and methods of the theory of hierarchical multi-level systems
(THMS), developed by M. Mesarovic and his colleagues [49].
The concept of hierarchy in a large system can be defined by pointing to several
essential characteristics inherent in all hierarchical systems. These include
consistent vertical arrangement of the subsystems that make up this system
(vertical decomposition);
priority of actions or the right to intervene for the subsystems of the upper level
in the functioning of subsystems of the lower level;
the dependence of the actions of the upper level subsystems on the actual
performance of their functions by the lower levels.
Following [49], we restrict ourselves to further consideration of the functional
hierarchical systems, which include technical systems. The formal definition of a
functional hierarchical system can be entered as follows:
1. A system (abstract) is a family of relations S ⊂ F over abstract sets X and Y.
2. If S is a function, S : X → Y , then the system is called functional.
3. There is a sequence of functional sets F0 , F1 , F2 , . . . , with the property
F0 ≤ F1 ≤ F2 ≤ . . .
4.2 Multi-level Models of Integrated Avionics 191
Thus, the functional hierarchical system is defined by sets of input (X) and output
(Y ) signals that are in a causal relationship, a set of F0 , which includes some initial
functions, and sets F1 , F2 , …, which, as a rule, are determined by specifying some
way of combining the original functions.
Due to the fact that the subsystems making up the system are entitled to solve
problems, the global goal of the system, reflecting its purpose as a whole, is divided
into a sequence of subgoals, so that the achievement of a complete goal is ensured
by the achievement of a set of subgoals.
Any functional hierarchical system consists of vertically coordinated subsystems
that transform input signals into output signals and interact in a specific way. Both
entrances and exits can be distributed across all levels, although most often they
exchange with the external environment at lower levels.
The interaction of subsystems of different levels consists of actions of the type
“intervention” and “reaction to intervention” (feedback). The intervention is obliga-
tory for the underlying levels, and the priority of actions and goals of higher levels is
expressed in it. Usually, the intervention is provided by the subsystem of the nearest
senior level.
What advantages does the concept of a hierarchical system give us for studying
and designing such a complex technical system as airborne avionics?
(1) The model (description) of the constructed complex system can be obtained
on the basis of the selection of the levels of description (stratification). This is
reflected in the process of developing the design documentation of any radio-
electronic system. The structure of such documentation includes electrical
structural, functional and principle systems of the system as a whole and its
individual parts, as well as design drawings of various levels of detailing.
The same applies to the system software that has a modular structure.
(2) If the global goal of a system can be achieved only on the basis of simulta-
neously solving a large number of tasks (performing many functions), then
a multi-level system often makes it easier to achieve a global goal. In each
specific case, it is necessary to assess whether the total effort spent on using a
multi-level system, including efforts to solve individual tasks and coordinate
subsystems, is less than the effort spent on solving a global problem with a
centralized system that provides the same level efficiency.
(3) The hierarchical system is generally less sensitive to changes in the structure
of interactions—changes that may be of a regular or random nature. Often,
changes in input signals affect only the solution of a local task by a single-level
subsystem and taking into account these changes by changing the algorithm
of the subsystem’s operation (its technical implementation) occurs at a much
lower cost than could be done in a centralized single-level system.
(4) The hierarchical system can be expanded easily than a centralized system. The
introduction of a new level does not require changes in the entire system, but
is provided, as a rule, only by coordinating the subsystems of the entered level
with the subsystems of the sixth level.
(5) In a hierarchical system, it is possible to localize changes in the procedure

for solving a problem at a specific level, caused by failures or failures in the
subsystem of this level. These changes do not spread so rapidly to the whole
system, which as a result turns out to be more tenacious than the centralized
system. The potential for improving reliability depends on the particular system
and the type of potential changes.
Three notions of levels are introduced in [49], which determine the classification
of hierarchical systems:
• level of description, or abstraction, called stratum;
• the level of difficulty in solving the problem, called layer;
• organizational level, called echelon.
Stratified system. A complex system is almost impossible to describe immediately
in full and in detail. Therefore, a family of models is introduced, which is called a
stratified description, and the hierarchical system presented in this way is a stratified
system. Virtually all sciences create products that are stratified descriptions of the
object of study. In technology, a simple example of such a description is a computer
model, the functioning of which is described on the first stratum by the language of
physical laws determining the functioning of electronic components, on the second
stratum by the language of Boolean algebra, on the third stratum by a low-level
programming language (assembler), on fourth stratum—high-level programming
languages, an operating system, etc.
Each stratum in the hierarchy of structures has its own set of variables that make it
possible to significantly limit the study and design of a technical system to only one
stratum. So, for a stratum computer, atomic physics is of interest in the development
of electronic components, and a system stratum is in the development of computing
systems.
The authors of the theory of hierarchical multi-level systems give the following
general characteristics of a stratified system description [49]:
1. The choice of strata in terms of which this system is described depends on
the observer, his knowledge and interest in the system’s activities, although for
many systems some strata seem natural, intrinsic to them.
2. Aspects of the description of the functioning of the system on different strata
are generally not interrelated, and therefore, the principles and laws used to
characterize the system on any stratum cannot generally be derived from the
principles used on other strata … Stratified A description is a description of the
same system from different points of view.
3. There is an asymmetric relationship between the operating conditions of the
system on different strata. Requirements for the work of the system on any
stratum act as conditions or restrictions on activities in the lower strata … The
course of the actual process is determined by the requirements for the system on
the upper stratum; in order for the system to function properly on this stratum,
all lower strata must work correctly …
4. Each stratum has its own set of terms, concepts and principles. What is the
object of consideration for this stratum is disclosed in more detail on the lower
stratum; element becomes a set; the subsystem on this stratum is a system for the
underlying one … The object-system relationship for descriptions on different
strata leads to a hierarchy of corresponding description languages …
5. The understanding of the system increases with a sequential transition from one
stratum to another: “The lower we go down the hierarchy, the more detailed the
system’s disclosure becomes, the higher we rise, the clearer the meaning and
significance of the whole system becomes.”
From the mathematical formalization of the notion of a “stratified system”, it
follows that stratification leads to a reduction of information going up the hierarchy:
For the upper strata, many output signals from the lower strata carry similar infor-
mation. This is due to the division of the underlying stratum into subsystems, and
the functioning and interaction of which between them leads to the fact that much
less information goes to the upper level than it circulates at the lower level.
The concept of a “system architecture” is close to the concept of a “stratified
system”, which appeared for the first time in computer technology and later widely
used in the development of various technical systems. According to F. Brooks, who
for the first time apparently used the term “architecture” in computing, “computer
architecture, like all architecture, is the art of defining users’ requirements for struc-
ture, and then designing in this way so that it would meet these requirements as
completely as possible under the given economic and technological constraints”
[50].
In the future, the concept of “system architecture” was repeatedly clarified and
enriched. Thus, according to G. Zemanek, “architectural design is design from top
to bottom, defining every detail as a function of the whole. From this point of view,
architectural design complements the formal definition: it is possible to determine
the details by the general structure only if the description method allows you to
completely omit the details and talk about the desired properties of the system as a
whole before starting any work on combining parts construction” [51].
According to G. Blaauw, in the project of any system, it is possible to select
three characteristic levels: architecture, execution and implementation. The system
architecture is a functional manifestation of the system from the user’s point of view
(“complete and detailed specification of the user-computer interface”); execution
means a logical description of the internal structure that makes it possible to perform
these functions; implementation is the physical embodiment of execution [52]. In
such an interpretation, “architecture”, “execution” and “implementation” are, appar-
ently, three levels of a stratified description of a technical system from the point of
view of the user, the developer and the manufacturer of the system.
In a good architecture, certain generally accepted principles are maintained. They
are clearly stated in the article by Blaauw [52]:
• Consistency. A good architecture is consistent, that is, a partial knowledge of the
system allows you to predict the rest.
• Orthogonality. This principle requires that functions are independent of each other
and are specified separately.
• Relevance. The architecture should include only those functions that meet existing
system requirements, in other words, there are no unnecessary functions in a good
architecture.
• Thrift. No function in the architecture description should duplicate another
function in one form or another.
• Transparency. Functions found in the execution process should be known to the
user.
• Community. If a function is to be entered, it should be entered in such a way that
it responds to as many appointments as possible.
• Openness. The user should be allowed to use the function in a different way than
it was supposed to be when designing.
• Completeness. The introduced functions should, taking into account the economic
and technological constraints, as closely as possible comply with the requirements
and wishes of the user.
Layer hierarchy. The hierarchy of layers, according to M. Mesarovich, is a set
of vertically located solving subsystems of increasing upward degree of complexity.
It is necessary to resort to hierarchy in the process of solving the problem under
conditions of large a priori uncertainty about the initial conditions. The solution of
the problem is divided into several blocks in such a way that the solution of the
subtask in the first (highest) block serves as the source data for the second block, and
the solution of the subtask in the second block is the source data for the third, etc.,
down to the lowest block.
To solve a subtask on the overlying layer, it can receive information from both
the external environment and feedbacks from the underlying layers.
A vivid example of a multi-layered description of an information system is the
“Open System Interconnection (OSI) Basic Reference Model”, adopted by the Inter-
national Organization for Standardization and the International Telegraph and Tele-
phony Advisory Committee in 1983 [53]. OSI is a seven-level model of data transfer
protocols, including the following basic levels (layers): physical, channel, network,
transport, session, data presentation and application.
The OSI concept has found application, in particular, in the development of ICAO
standards and ARINC recommendations for ATN systems and networks (see clause
3.2.10), as well as in the development of the IMA concept recorded in ARINC 651
and other ARINC documents describing the elements of IMA.
Multi-echelon system (organizational hierarchy). This concept of hierarchy
implies that (1) a real system consists of a set of interacting subsystems; (2) some
of the subsystems solve problems; (3) one of the subsystems that solve problems is
influenced by or controlled by other subsystems that solve problems.
Multi-echelon systems are also called multipurpose, in the sense that the subsys-
tems that solve problems usually have their own, often conflicting, goals. In order
for the multipurpose hierarchical system to function effectively, it is essential that
the subsystems that solve the problem are given some leeway: as long as the func-
tioning of the lower level subsystem does not contradict the goal of the upper level
subsystem. This expresses the principle of hierarchical autonomy [54].
In the airborne aircraft complexes, the multi-echelon system is a hierarchical
system of distributed information processing. In particular, all types of single-
function avionics of the type of electronic sensors are on the first (lower) organi-
zational level (echelon). The computer navigation system is on the second, higher
organizational level. In this sense, their combination, realized in the form of an
integrated system, will be a two-echelon system.
Further, we will use the approach to the definition of a multi-level technical system,
developed on the basis of THMS in [55]. According to this approach, a technical
system is represented as a set of interrelated elements (subsystems): Technical means
are considered as elements of the system, and the set of functions performed is the
goal of their functioning. In accordance with this, the concept of a multi-level model
of the system structure as a set of functional and technical structures of the system
is introduced.
The functional structure is defined as a set of functional subsystems of different
levels of detail with certain relationships between them. Functional subsystems are
functions of a different level performed by the system:
(1) functional task—the system converts the input information flow into the output.
(2) system function—the stage of information transformation when solving a
functional task;
(3) the function of the unit—the provision of resources of a certain type, necessary
for the performance of a functional task;
(4) procedure—a private function of the unit (e.g., for a processor—program
execution, for ROM—program storage, for RAM—data storage, etc.).
The technical structure is defined as a set of technical subsystems of several
levels of detail and relations between them. The following levels of detail are
highlighted:
(1) topological structure—the level of conjugation of subsystems into the system
(subsystems and the means of their conjugation into the system);
(2) the level of subsystems on the basis of the functions performed (functions of
the system or parts of a functional task) and the type of objects served;
(3) the level of subsystems as associations of devices that solve their specific
functions (unit functions) to perform the function of the system;
(4) the level of units of specific types.
Thus, at levels 1–3, conceptual subsystems are considered, at level 4, specific
types of units.
The relationships between the functional tasks and the subsystems included in the
topological structure show how the tasks are distributed between the subsystems.
The relations between the functions of the system and the technical subsystems
of level 2 of detail, which are distinguished by the characteristics of the functions
performed (e.g., the signal processing subsystem), show how the system’s functions
are distributed between the subsystems.
At level 3 of the technical structure specification, subsystems are considered,
which are conceptual combinations of units of the same type (e.g., signal processors).
At level 4 of the technical structure specification, specific types of units are consid-
ered, their technical compatibility relations are determined, showing the possibility
of their joint operation in the system, and the feasibility of various procedures in
these units is analyzed.
In our opinion, “functional structure” and “technical structure” are two types of
stratified description. The functional structure is a stratified description of the func-
tions of the system; the technical structure is a stratified description of the technical
means that implement the system.
Another approach to the THMS about the multi-level technical system and the
process of its design is the “functional–structural approach” described in [56, 57].
It is based on the concepts of functional and structural organizations of technical
systems.
“The functional organization of the system is a model of the system, built on
the basis of functional elements, reflecting the main functional connections between
them. The structural organization of a system is a model of a system based on struc-
tural (constructive) elements, reflecting their interconnections in the process of func-
tioning” [57]. These definitions are close in meaning to the definitions of the concepts
of functional structure and technical structure; however, the objections are the use of
the terms “organization” and “structure”. A number of authors identify these terms.
Others, such as, for example, M. Mesarovic, understand under the organization “a
family of interacting, hierarchically located elements, endowed with the right to make
decisions”. This concept leads to a multi-echelon model of a hierarchical system.
Accepting this last definition, we believe that it is more correct to speak about
the functional structure of the system, especially since the description of “functional
organization” means that “the main and additional functions of a multi-level system
can be represented as a tree of functions implemented by individual subsystems and
elements located at different levels of the system hierarchy” [57].
Instead of the term “structural organization”, the use of the term “technical struc-
ture” is appropriate, which corresponds to the context of books [56, 57] devoted to
the design of hardware and software of micro and minicomputers.
In [58], the concept of microprocessor architecture is considered. “Microprocessor
architecture—the functional capabilities of the microprocessor hardware electronics
used to represent data, machine operations, description of algorithms and compu-
tation processes. The architecture combines hardware, firmware and software of
computer technology and makes it possible to clearly distinguish what, when creating
a specific microprocessor system … must be implemented by the user through soft-
ware and additional hardware.” It is indicated that when developing an architecture of
microprocessors and information-controlling systems based on them, it is necessary
• to describe the conceptual structure of the functional behavior of the system from
the standpoint of taking into account the interests of the user in its construction
and organization of the computational process in it;
• determine the structure, nomenclature and features of the construction of software
and firmware;
• describe the characteristics of the internal organization of data flows and control
information;
• to analyze the functional structure and features of the physical implementation of
the system devices.
Thus, the author also uses the concepts of functional structure, physical imple-
mentation as components of architecture in a sense close to [55].
In [59], an approach to defining a computer architecture is presented, caused by
the need to improve this architecture as compared to the von Neumann architecture
on the basis of orientation to programming languages. The architecture is defined
as a multi-level model (Fig. 4.7), the upper level of which is composed of user
application programs. This level interacts with the external environment through two
sets of interfaces: languages (such as the language of the computer operator, the task
management language, programming languages, database management languages,
1
User application programs
2 1
Language translators
3
Management Software aids
of logical resources
4
Management
of physical resources
5 5 5
Program execu- Micro-
6 tion programs
7
Inrut/output 6 Processors Integrated
circuits
9 9
Controllers 6 Controllers 6
10 10 8
Communication
channels Memory
and terminal units
Fig. 4.7 Multi-level computer model based on orientation to programming languages

etc.) and programs (application programs, editing programs, sorting, recovery, etc.).
The development of the system architecture involves the definition of both groups
of these interfaces.
Interfaces 2, 3 and 4 delimit certain levels within the software, which the author
collectively calls the software architecture. Level 2 includes language translators
that interact with lower levels 3, 4 of the software. Level 3 management of logical
resources may include the implementation of functions such as database manage-
ment, files and virtual memory. The level 4 management of physical resources
includes the functions of managing external and operative memory, internal processes
occurring in the system (e.g., planning and synchronization processes), as well as
other hardware means. These levels actually reflect the separation of the computer
operating system.
Level 5 reflects the line of demarcation of the system, and it is the border
between the system software (the operating system) and the hardware, by which
the author means both microprograms and integrated circuits. Level 5 allows you to
imagine the physical structure of the system abstractly regardless of the method of
implementation.
Layer architecture (interfaces) 7, 9 and 10 defines physical I/O. Interface 6 is a
microprogram interface that provides the flow of data and control signals with the
format of microcommands. Interface 8 defines the exchange between the processor
and the main memory. Together, the listed interfaces define the architecture or
processor organization.
If the system is multiprocessor, then its architecture reflects a vertical section of
this model and describes the distribution of functions between a group of processors
with the definition of the corresponding interfaces.
The presented computer architecture is “an abstract representation or definition
of a physical system from the point of view of a computer programmer developing
a programmer’s language or a compiler developer” [59].
In the process of developing a modern integrated avionics, this multi-level model
can be applied when choosing the form of separation between hardware and soft-
ware parts of the system, distributing operating system functions between proces-
sors, implementing interfaces in the already chosen system architecture. The very
choice of architecture that uses modern processors, as a rule, is not guided by one
or other considerations regarding the computer structure from the point of view of
the programmer. Desirable, but not obligatory is the use of one of the widely used
operating systems. In critical applications, the assembler programming is done on
the already selected process taking into account the interfaces determined by this
choice.
Typical variants of integrated systems can be determined (constructed) by
analyzing possible relationships between a multi-level functional structure and a
multi-level technical structure. We will further call the degree of integration at the
i-th level the correspondence between the number of functions of the i-th level and the
number of elements of the i-th level that perform these functions. For a non-integrated
system, the following variants of such a correspondence can be distinguished:
• single-target system—a system that solves one-functional task;

• single-function system—a system that performs one function;
• single-function subsystem—a subsystem that performs one function;
• single-function unit—a device that performs one function.
If two or more systems solve the same functional problem within the framework of
the supersystem to which they belong, then we can speak of the functional integration
of the supersystem. A somewhat artificial example is the display on several electronic
indicators of the same navigation information.
If in the system several subsystems (units) perform the same function, then we
speak of the functional integration of the system [44]. An example is the flight-
navigation complex, in which navigation information on the coordinates and param-
eters of motion is received from several independent sensors and is used to solve
the same navigation task. In this case, they also speak about complexing navigation
sensors [60–62].
The multifunctionality of the system (subsystems, units) leads to the concept of
hardware integration, as defined in [44] (the same resources can perform different
functions).
Multifunctionality at the topological structure level defines system hardware inte-
gration, at level 2 of the technical structure—hardware integration of the subsystem,
at level 3—hardware integration of the unit and at level 4—hardware integration of
the node.
An example of system hardware integration is the airborne VOR/DME equip-
ment, which simultaneously receives signals of VOR and DME radio beacons,
processes them and measures the azimuth to the VOR beacon and the distance to
the DME beacon. An example of hardware integration of the subsystem is the signal
processing subsystem, which is included in the VOR/DME avionics and simulta-
neously processes signals of the beacons of the VOR and DME. An example of
hardware integration of a unit is an input/output processor, which simultaneously
receives digital input control data for the entire avionics and provides output data
on the measured VOR azimuth and DME range. An example of the hardware inte-
gration of a node is the bipolar sequential code formation node in accordance with
ARINC 429, which provides the VOR azimuth and DME range information in the
input–output processor.
Hardware integration of various levels is quite common in avionics of various
generations, where often multifunctional equipment (hardware integrated at the level
of the topological structure) contains single-function devices and multifunctional
nodes.
The simultaneity of functions in hardware integration is not mandatory and in the
strict sense of the word is not always feasible. It is often possible to talk about the
quasi-one-time execution of a system (subsystem, unit, node) of several functions,
when alternating time intervals between the execution of the same function are signif-
icantly less than the total operating time. Examples include a multichannel ADC with
an input switch that performs alternate sampling and quantization of several input
signals, as well as a computer in a multitasking mode that simultaneously solves
(quasi-simultaneous) several computational problems. Further, for brevity, we will

speak in similar cases about the simultaneous performance of functions. An example
of a truly simultaneous execution of functions is a multichannel receiving unit.
The case when the functions are performed with separation in time, that is, for
a time interval commensurate with the total operating time, the hardware-integrated
system (subsystem, unit, node) performs only one function differs from the consid-
ered variant of hardware integration. An example is the implementation of various
functions of the same programmable logic integrated circuit (FPGA) when loading
various files from the ROM that define the FPGA configuration into it.
4.3 Typical Topological Structures of Hardware-Integrated

Avionics of Navigation, Landing, Data Exchange
and Air Traffic Control
Consideration of a single-function avionics as a distributed information processing

system allows to highlight its following important properties [63]:
(1) Avionics is a combination of signal processing subsystem operating in real time
in the form of a conveyor operating in the forward (from antenna to DP) and
reverse (from DP to antenna) directions, and data processing subsystem that
processes data DSP and other data transformed by DSP, with the tempo that
is necessary for solving navigation tasks, i.e., not necessarily in real time. If
the processing sequence in the pipelines is specified by the radio problem task,
then the data processing in the DP follows the usual laws of the functioning of
computers interacting with external devices.
(2) Attempting to add another avionics function while maintaining this topological
structure leads to the addition of another parallel operating conveyor, the output
of which can be fed to the input of the same DP.
(3) Reserving avionics while maintaining this topological structure also leads only
to a doubling of the number of information processing units of each type.
(4) The pipeline has a potentially low reliability compared with other topological
structures of information processing: The failure of any device included in its
structure leads to the failure of the system as a whole. At the same time, for
the operation of the avionics radio track, the pipeline must be maintained.
(5) The operation of the aviation REC includes the composition of the systems
with which the complex works, which changes during the flight. It is related
• with changing priorities of working with systems in accordance with the
tactics of using RECs in various phases of flight;
• with the need to choose the composition of radio sensors for integrated
processing of navigation data during failures in communication channels.
As a result, for some time in flight, practically each of the types of single-function
avionics does not work, which reduces the efficiency of using avionics.
4.3 Typical Topological Structures of Hardware-Integrated … 201
The properties of this classic topological structure of avionics have led to the
overload of modern aircraft with one-function equipment, which increases the cost
of the life cycle and reduces the reliability of avionics as a whole.
This contradiction can be resolved if the principles of the model of a computer
collective are used in the construction of hardware-integrated (multifunctional)
avionics: parallel processing, variability and uniformity of the structure.
Considering that all devices included in the avionics structure are informa-
tion processing unit (IPU), we introduce the concept of a model of collective of
information processing units [63].
By analogy with the model of the collective of computers, the model of the
collective of the IPU can formally be described by a pair
< Y, A >,
Y = {a1 , . . . , a L , b1 , . . . , b N , c1 , . . . , c N , d1 , . . . , d R , f 1 , . . . , f R , g1 , . . . ,
g Q , h 1 , . . . , h Q } is a set of interconnected antenna-feeder devices ai (i = 1, . . . , L),
receivers bi (i = 1, . . . , N ), signal processors ci (i = 1, . . . , N ), signal processors
di (i = 1, . . . , R), transmitters f i (i = 1, . . . , R), data processors gi (i = 1, . . . , Q),
input/output processors h i (i = 1, . . . , Q);
A—the algorithm of the functioning of the collective of the IPU as a whole.
The following expression takes into account the following features of the model
arising from the avionics objectives:
The number of antenna-feeder devices L may differ from the number of receiving
and transmitting paths and is determined by the number of avionics functions adopted
for a particular aircraft, type of aircraft, the need for redundancy and other factors. On
the operated aircraft are mainly used one- and two-function antennas with different
types of polarization (see Table 1.1). In the future, as a result of the development
of multifunctional antennas or even “intellectual skin” of the aircraft, the number of
antennas may change.
The number of receivers and DSPs is the same, since they must form the paths
for receiving and processing signals.
The number of SSPs and transmitters is also the same, since they must form paths
for the formation and emission of signals.
The number of DP and IOP is also advisable to choose the same, because, as a
rule, when performing the functions of flight management, the number of DP, taking
into account the redundancy, does not exceed two, and each computer has its own
IOP. The number of pairs of DP-IOP is determined by considerations of reservation.
The algorithm A of the work of the IPU collective should provide a solution to the
functional task of integrated avionics. It is a composition of information processing
algorithms in different IPU, communication and interaction algorithms between
IPUs and depends on the structure G of the communication subnet of information
processing units.
In contrast to the model of the collective of computers in this model, the principle
of constructive uniformity (uniformity) of all information processing devices cannot
be respected in principle. However, the principle of regularity of the structure, which
consists in the presence of repetitive devices of the same type in this structure, is
practically fruitful.
Increasing the regularity of the instrumental part of the system is to reduce the
number of types of structural units and unify the connections between them at
different structural levels. From an economic point of view, increasing the degree
of regularity is the implementation of in-device standardization and unification. The
economic effect of increasing the degree of regularity takes place both in the process
of creation and in the process of operating the system, which characterizes the direct
interrelation of the criterion of the cost of the life cycle of the system with the criterion
of the complexity of the structure.
The economic effect when creating avionics with a regular structure is provided
by
• a decrease in the volume of technical documentation, that is, a reduction in the
timing of its development;
• the possibility of using workers of lower qualification in carrying out working
drawings, drawing up diagrams, etc.;
• reducing the complexity of design due to uniformity and simplicity of the
structure;
• reducing the cost of manufacturing and testing prototypes;
• reducing the cost of manufacturing test equipment and tuning avionics by reducing
the number of types of nodes and increasing the volume of their release;
• more extensive possibilities for automating the manufacture of hardware modules,
as with an increase in the degree of regularity of the structure, technological
processes for the manufacture of equipment become more homogeneous (of the
same type).
The economic effect during the operation of avionics with a regular structure is
provided by
• simplification of repair and replacement of failed modules, reduction of recovery
time in case of failures;
• ease of use simplified operational documentation of reduced volume;
• a decrease in the number of spare parts and their diversity;
• weakening of requirements for the level of qualification and training of service
personnel.
Increasing the degree of regularity can give an economic effect for any element
base. When using LSI and VLSI, the main economic effect is formed as a result of
reducing the number of types of integrated circuits and increasing the regularity of
their internal structure. At the same time, the reduction of the LSI nomenclature used
in the structure of the avionics, even at their high cost, can significantly reduce the
cost of all equipment. The full effect depends on the volume of release of avionics.
Thus, the use of the principle of regularity of structural decisions is aimed at
reducing the cost and time costs for the development, manufacture and commis-
sioning of equipment. In cases where the compared versions of the structures differ
slightly in the composition of the modules, it is reasonable to choose the best of them
according to the criterion of maximum regularity of the structure.
The maximum regularity in the considered topological structure of the model of
a collective of IPUs is achieved if identical devices of each type are used, i.e., the
principle of constructive uniformity of the same components of the IPUs collective
is implemented.
Depending on the degree of hardware integration of the IPUs, it is possible
to propose several typical topological structures of hardware-integrated avionics
(Figs. 4.8, 4.9, 4.10 and 4.11) [63].
The architecture 1 of integrated avionics (Fig. 4.9) contains R single-functional
different type signal forming channels and N single-functional signal processing
Single- Single-
functional R functional
type 1 DSP type 1
DP
Single- Single-
functional R functional
type N DSP type N
Communica-
tion subnet
of the pro-
IOP
Single- Single- cessors
functional T functional
type 1 SSP type 1
Single- Single-
functional T functional
type M SSP type M
Fig. 4.8 Topological structure of multifunctional avionics with single-functional different types
channels for the formation and processing of signals (architecture 1 integrated avionics)
RF
comm. Мultifunctional Мultifunctional
1 R DSP
DP IOP
RF Мultifunctional
comm. Мultifunctional SSP
2 T
Fig. 4.9 Topological structure of multifunctional avionics with single hardware-integrated channels
of signal shaping and processing (architecture 2 integrated avionics)
Мultifunctional Мultifunctional
R type 1 DSP type 1
RF
comm. DP
1
R type N DSP type N
Communica-
tion subnet of
the processors
R type 1 SSP type 1
IOP
RF
comm.
2 Мultifunctional Мultifunctional
R type M SSP type M
Fig. 4.10 Topological structure of multifunctional avionics with different types of hardware-
integrated channels for the shaping and processing of signals (architecture 3 integrated avionics)
АR DR DSP
1 1 1
Comm. Comm.
АR DR
RF −DR −DSP
comm.
АR DR DSP DP
N N N
Communication
subnet of the
Conv. SSP processors
1 Comm. 1
SSP
−Conv.
IOP
Conv. SSP
M M
Fig. 4.11 Topological structure of the multifunctional avionics with the same type of hardware-
integrated channels for the shaping and processing of signals (architecture 4 integrated avionics)
channels that exchange information with DP and IOP through the communication
subnet of the processors. This structure has the smallest degree of IPUs integration,
which is implemented only in DP and IOP.
An example of avionics implemented in architecture 1 is the airborne equip-
ment for near navigation, landing and inter-aircraft navigation A-331 (VNIIRA JSC)
(Fig. 4.12).
Architecture 2 of the integrated avionics (Fig. 4.8) contains a single multifunc-
tional signal shaping channel, including multifunctional SSPs and a transmitter, as
Fig. 4.12 Block diagram of avionics of short-range navigation, landing and inter-aircraft navigation
A-331
well as a single multifunctional signal processing channel, including a multifunc-

tional receiver and DSP. Signal shaping and processing processors exchange informa-
tion with DP and IOP on separate communication lines. Depending on the operating
modes, the receiver and transmitter can be connected to various antennas included in
the ASF using RF switches 1 and 2. Such a structure is beneficial if the avionics should
operate in a temporary separation mode with radio systems of close frequency bands.
The degree of integration of the avionics modules is determined by technological
capabilities.
Examples of avionics implemented on architecture 2 are RSBN-85 airborne navi-
gation and landing equipment (VNIIRA JSC) and VIM-95 airborne navigation and
landing equipment (Navigator JSC) (Fig. 4.13).
The main disadvantage of architecture 2 is the impossibility of simultaneous
operation of avionics in several modes. This disadvantage is eliminated by the use of
several different types of multifunctional channels for the formation and processing
of signals in architecture 3 of the integrated avionics (Fig. 4.10). In contrast to
architecture 1, this technical solution allows the simultaneous operation of avionics
in a much larger number of modes with the same number of modules. The number
Fig. 4.13 Block diagram of avionics navigation and landing VIM-95

of functions in multifunctional RF modules is determined mainly by the frequency

ranges and technological capabilities.
An example of avionics implemented in architecture 3 is the integrated radio
navigation system IRNS (see Chap. 7).
Architecture 1 and architecture 3 are characterized by the use of different types of
processing and signal generation channels. Although the modules of such avionics
can be implemented with a significant degree of unification, the degree of regularity
of these structures is low, which does not allow to fully implement all the principles
and advantages of the IRU collective model. The greatest degree of regularity of the
structure can be achieved by creating:
• a universal receiving device consisting of analog and digital parts with the
distribution of functions between these parts optimal for the current level of
technology;
• a universal frequency converter, providing the issuance of RF signals from any
of the systems serviced by integrated avionics at any operating frequency of the
transmission range;
• universal DSP and SSP.
As data processors, universal airborne digital computers with a wired-program
computer can be used, interacting with the IOP, DSP and SSP on the processor
communication subnetwork.
To specify the topological structure with universal UOI (architecture 4), it
is necessary to take into account the current state of the technology of radio
receivers. Since the 1980s, there has been an intensive introduction of digital signal
processing methods into radio receivers [64–66]. The use of DSP gives developers
and consumers significant advantages over traditional analog solutions:
• ensuring the stability of processing parameters;
• the ability to quickly change the parameters of a radio receiving device if it is
necessary to switch to receiving another type of signals;
• possibility of automatic adaptation to reception conditions;
• providing multichannel with identical channel characteristics;
• reduction of restructuring time due to new approaches to the construction of
frequency synthesizers;
• reduction in weight, size and circuitry simplification, leading to a significant
increase in reliability.
The introduction of DSP into a radio receiver device leads to its separation into
analog (AR) and digital (DR) parts. The boundary of the section is an analog-to-
digital converter (ADC), which provides for the discretization of the signal and
the formation of its quadrature samples. Therefore, the development capabilities of
digital receiving devices largely depend on the characteristics of existing ADCs.
The structure of the DR depends on whether the oscillation is sampled and quan-
tized at a radio frequency (RF) or at an intermediate frequency (IF). Performing
these procedures on the RF provides a more complete use of the advantages of
DSP and allows you to exclude from the composition of the DR frequency synthe-
sizer. However, the tunable preselector should have a narrow bandwidth and a high
squareness of the frequency response, and the RF path should have a sufficient gain.
When sampling and quantizing at the IF, the structure of a significant part of the
receiving path and the requirements for the frequency synthesizer differ little from
digital and analog receivers. This reduces the advantages of introducing DSP, but it
makes it easier to achieve the required AR gain and allows, at a high squareness of
the frequency response, to bring the width of the ARm to the minimum required for
all types of received signals. Filtering of each specific type of signals is performed
by digital filters of the main frequency selection. As a result, the requirements for
the sampling frequency and digit capacity of the ADC are reduced, which greatly
facilitate the implementation of the DR [66].
The introduction of methods for digital conversion of the IF spectrum to video
frequency and the use of specialized single-chip processors—digital down converter
(DDC) has become one of the main directions of modern developments in the field
of digital radio [65].
In parallel, research and development in the field of digital signal generation has
led to the actual separation of radio transmitting devices used in communication
systems into the digital part, currently being implemented using digital up-converter
(DUC) and the analog part, which is from a digital-to-analog converter (DAC) of
quadrature readings (if it is not included in the DUC) into a signal on the IF, a
converter of this signal into the RF signal (DF) and a power amplifier (UM). In the
future, we will assume that the digital part of the radio transmitting device is part of
the SSP.
Taking into account the separation of receivers and transmitters into the analog
and digital parts, architecture 4 of integrated avionics can be represented (Fig. 4.11)
as a structure consisting of M channels of the same type with the “SSP-Converter”
commutator and N channels of the same type of signal processing with the “AR-
DR” and “DR-DSP” commutators. A more detailed topological structure of avionics
with full hardware integration, including units for communication with AFU and
redundant DP and IOP, is presented in Fig. 4.14 [63].
In this structure, the work of M pairs of transmitting and receiving tracks on
M antenna-feeder units is provided by the amplifying-distribution unit (Fig. 4.15).
The remaining L-M antenna-feeder units, providing only reception functions, are
connected directly to the L-R high-frequency units. The amplifying-distribution unit
includes power amplifiers (PA) signals coming from the outputs of the HF commu-
tator 2 in the operating modes of avionics (i.e., terminal stages of transmitting units)
and antenna switches (AS).
High-frequency units HFU 1 ÷ HFU L provide preamplification, bandpass
filtering, input of control signals from the outputs of HF commutator 2, as well as the
conversion of the frequency range MLS 5030 ÷ 5090.7 MHz (in Fig. 4.14—HFU
L-R) to about 1000 MHz.
208
АFU 1 АFU (L-R) АFU (L-R+1) АFU L
Subsystem of signal processing
System HF unit
Amplifying-distribution unit
HFU 1 HFU (L-R) HFU (L-R+1) HFU L
device and redundancy DP, IOP

Subsystem
HF commutator 1 of signal shaping
HF commutator 2
АR 1 АR N
Conv. 1 Conv. M
AR-DR commutator
SSP-Conv. commutator
DR 1 DR N
DR − DSP commutator Inter-system connection
Subnetwork of DP MCS
DSP 1 DSP N SSP 1 SSP M DP 1 DP Q SSP 1 SSP Q
Processors communication subnetwork

4 Principles of Integration of Airborne Radio-Electronic Equipment
Fig. 4.14 Topological structure of avionics with full hardware integration, high-frequency system
Together with the amplifying-distribution unit and HF commutator 1, HFD 1 ÷

L make up the system HF unit. The latter may be specific for each type of aircraft
and be developed according to a separate technical task.
HF commutator 1 provides a high-frequency signal from the output of any of the L
high-frequency devices to the input of any of the M analog portions of the receivers.
HF commutator 2 provides a working high-frequency signal from the output of
any of the M frequency converters to the input of any of the M amplifiers of the
amplifying-distribution unit or feeds a control high-frequency signal from the output
of any of the M frequency converters to the input of any of L high-frequency devices.
The AR-DR commutator provides the output signal of any of the N analog receiver
parts, depending on the implementation, as an intermediate frequency signal or as
digital quadrature components at the input of any of the N digital receiver parts.
The SSP-converter commutator provides the output signal of any of the M signal
processors, depending on the implementation, in the form of video signals or in
the form of digital quadrature components to the input of any of the M frequency
converters.
The DR-DSP commutator provides the output digital signal of any of the N digital
parts of the receivers to the input of any of the N signal processors.
The processors communication subnetwork provides for the exchange of naviga-
tion data and control messages between the DSP, SSP, DP and IOP.
A separate communication subnetwork can be created for the exchange of status
information and control transfer between data processors, each of which in this
structure can act as a control processor.
In the above structure, you can conditionally highlight the following subsystems:
• signal processing subsystem, which includes a system RF device, AR, AR-DR
commutator, DR, DR-DSP commutator, DSP;
• subsystem of signal shaping, including SSP, SSP-converter commutator,
converter, HF commutator 2;
• measuring and computing subsystem (MCS), including DSP, SSP, DP, IOP,
processor communication subnetwork and DP communication subnetwork. This
subsystem overlaps with the two previous ones in the DSP and the SSP, due to the
fact that the DSP and the SSP can be developed and analyzed from two points of
view—as elements of the signal processing and generation tracks and as elements
of a multi-machine MCS.
All of the listed switches and communication subnets make up the communication
subnet G, and each of the states of which creates N tracks of parallel processing of
information, similar to N sets of single-function avionics, parallel processing of data
in Q data processors and simultaneous data exchange with adjacent systems. Thus,
this structure corresponds to the principle of parallelism of information processing
and the principle of variability (programmability) of the structure.
The advantages and disadvantages of single-function avionics and the proposed
typical hardware-integrated avionics structures are given in Table 4.2.
Table 4.2 The advantages and disadvantages of single-function avionics and the proposed typical
hardware-integrated avionics structures
Typical topological structure of Advantages Disadvantages
non-reserved avionics
Single-function avionics – The solution to only
one-functional problem
Low reliability and high cost
of the FNS life cycle with
several types of avionics
Multifunctional avionics with The ability to simultaneously Lack of interchangeability of
single-functional different solve several functional tasks receivers, transmitters, SSP,
types channels for the DSP
formation and processing of
signals (architecture 1)
Multifunctional avionics with The ability to solve several Time division signal
single hardware-integrated functional tasks processing
channels of signal shaping and
processing (architecture 2)
Multifunctional avionics with The ability to simultaneously Incomplete interchangeability
different types of solve several functional tasks of receivers, transmitters,
hardware-integrated channels SSP, DSP
for the shaping and processing
of signals (architecture 3)
Multifunctional avionics with The ability to simultaneously –
the same type of solve several functional tasks
hardware-integrated channels Full receivers, transmitters,
for the shaping and processing SSP, DSP interchangeability
of signals (architecture 4)
The model of the IPU collective, being quite versatile in architectural terms, has
its limitations. They are related to the radiotechnical nature of the tasks that can be
solved by integrated avionics with a structure corresponding to this model.
There are other approaches to the construction of integrated avionics that, like
the authors’ approach, proceed from the model of a collective of computers and
use one or another method of parallel processing. In particular, an approach to
the creation of integrated navigation equipment based on information processing
in parallel function-oriented processors (FOP) [67] is being developed. The theory
of the creation of the FOP was developed by the school of Smolov [68].
The disadvantage of the approach proposed in [67] is the need to create a parallel
FOP for each system (each function of the integrated equipment), which violates the
principle of uniformity inherent in the model of a collective of computers. At the
same time, one of the examples cited—a video processor based on systolic oper-
ating devices used by the author for calculations in the IRS, can serve as a basis for
creating a uniform computational structure, solving and other tasks of integrated
avionics. Naturally, the above considerations are related to non-radio integrated
technical equipment.
At the conclusion of this chapter, we compare the proposed architecture 4 of

integrated avionics with the IMA variants described in ARINC 651. From the point of
view of the IMA concept, the fully integrated avionics have the following properties:
(1) Each signal processor and each digital part of the receiving device contain in
their memory all applied signal processing programs.
(2) Each signal shaping processor contains in its memory all signal shaping
programs.
(3) At the same time in each of the listed devices, there is only one application
program.
(4) The planning and management of the implementation of application programs
is carried out by one executive program located in the data processor (see
Sect. 4.4). There are various options for this placement, determining a greater
or lesser degree of centralization of the avionics control elements.
(5) I/O processors simultaneously serve all channels of shaping and processing
data.
(6) In the data processor, applications will be programs for solving navigation prob-
lems, complex information processing, shaping and processing of messages
transmitted and received by the data link. The DP communications subnet-
work provides for the redistribution of resources in the process of performing
tasks and the transfer of functions in the event of the failure of any DP or its
components.
Thus, the proposed topological structure of a fully integrated avionics, described
by architecture 4, can be qualified as a system with logically and physically distributed
multifunctional elements of signal and data processing, centralized input–output
elements and partially centralized controls. It bears the features of “C” architecture
(processing resources depend on input–output data, in particular, on data on the
modes in which processing channels should work) and on the “E” architecture (with
the difference that dynamic reconfiguration of equipment is possible). In general,
the architecture of a fully integrated avionics is consistent with the principles of the
IMA concept, as outlined in the ARINC 651 recommendations.
4.4 The Structure and Functions of the Software

of the MCS of a Fully Integrated Avionics
of Navigation, Landing, Data Exchange and ATC
The software structure of the measuring and computing subsystem of the integrated
avionics with full hardware integration contains the following components:
• application software that performs the functions of an integrated avionics;
• an executive program providing the standard and general conditions in which the
application programs are executed and consisting of the following parts:
(a) operating system (OS);

(b) function management program;
(c) resource management tools;
(d) built-in monitoring tools (BMT) or an avionics condition monitor.
The current trend of increasing the size and complexity of embedded software
has led to the development of technologies based on the functional separation of
application programs among themselves and with the operating system, in which
application programs cannot influence each other or the OS. In the MCS of the
integrated avionics, the functions and, therefore, the application programs must be
distributed among the processors of signal shaping and processing, data processing
and input–output. In this case, there may be several application programs in each of
the processes. Specific combinations of application programs provide the functions
of an integrated avionics.
In order to ensure the integration and coordinated work of application programs
with each other and with a specific hardware part, clearly defined technical require-
ments are necessary. These requirements define the interface between each applica-
tion program and hardware resources, as well as the order in which resources are
provided. The interface should describe
(a) a logical method of resource management and internal communication;
(b) means of displaying a logical method on the equipment.
The combination of these two parts provides standard conditions in which the
application software can work. The separation of interface requirements into two
parts has clear advantages. First of all, it provides not only isolation of application
programs from changes in the hardware design process, but also makes it possible
to execute computing hardware resources in any way, provided that this does not
contradict the definition of the interface. Thus, the design of the equipment and its
implementation is separated from the software design and its implementation.
Secondly, the separation of application software and hardware allows you to
implement ways to upgrade hardware that will not cause the catastrophic destruction
of existing application software.
Thus, the benefits of providing common logical conditions in which application
programs will work are as follows:
• Many independently developed application programs can work in the same
hardware.
• Standard interface separates hardware changes and software changes.
• The separation of MCS verification into independent tasks related to hardware,
application software and interface software (operating system) reduces the cost
of verification.
• Software portability is improved.
• Development control equipment can be standardized.
• reduced cost of software life cycle.
4.4 The Structure and Functions of the Software of the MCS … 213
Application software is a set of programs that, together with the hardware, execute
the functions of signal shaping and processing, data processing and input/output.
These functions, presented in the form of algorithms, together constitute the second
level of the functional structure of the MCS. Application software is specified, devel-
oped and verified to a level of criticality corresponding to the function of a particular
system, which is performed by the integrated avionics (avionics profile). At any level
of system criticality, an application program must be carefully separated from other
application programs.
All communications between application programs and the MCS are performed
through the operating system, whose mechanism ensures that there are no interface
violations and there is no application program that can monopolize resources or leave
another program constantly suspended, waiting for an interprogram request.
One of the essential functions of the application software is input–output
processing. In the interests of portability and reuse, the application software architec-
ture should define the input–output software as specific to the aircraft and separate it
from the functional and algorithmic elements of other application programs. Logical
I/O matching is a separate function associated with a sensor. In the case of integrated
avionics I/O matching, it is advisable to separate it into a separate I/O processor
software that serves all the avionics functions.
The operating system consists of three elements:
• the internal resident part of the OS that manages the OS processes and distributes
physical resources for them;
• the distributed part of the OS, which provides control of the processes in each
processor as an element of a multi-machine IWP;
• the system part of the OS, which provides control of the avionics state and its
reconfiguration, based on the requirements for the implementation of functions
and data on detected system failures.
The main role of the OS is to maintain functional integrity in planning and
launching application programs. The OS manages the allocation of resources, the
scheduling of tasks, the monitoring of working application programs and their
execution in accordance with the fault tolerance strategy.
A distributed operating system serves a multicomputer MCS and allows all
computing resources to be treated as a single virtual processor. Software for
distributed OS is considered as downloadable software modules that can be inde-
pendently translated. The resource management program issues commands to load
software modules in accordance with the requirements for implementing system
functions. Software modules of the distributed part of the OS can be loaded into
any MCS processor. The system part of the OS dynamically reconfigures software
modules in the event of a processor failure or to maintain the sequence of performance
of the avionics functions.
The function management program receives requests for functions from the crew
and from the REC control system, receives data on system failures from BMT and
sets priorities for requests and issues commands to the resource management tools
to execute these requests.
Resource management tools consist of the following elements:

• resource allocation programs;
• a resource planner program that determines how common resources are provided
to the required functions;
• resource controllers that control the exchange of information between resources
and the system.
• Built-in controls should detect and locate avionics failures in flight during
operation and reconfigure it in conjunction with resource management tools.
Both application software and operating systems have a multi-level hierarchical
structure and are distributed throughout the integrated avionics. At the top level, the
DP contains the system part of the operating system, the program for managing the
functions of navigation, landing, data exchange and ATC, the BMT dispatcher, the
resource allocation program and data processing application programs. At the middle
level are placed: in DP—a program of the resource planner, controller BMT, in the
processors of processing and shaping signals—application programs of processing
and shaping signals. At the lower level, in the hardware part of the resources, the
control programs of the modules are located. Built-in controls are placed on all levels
from data processors to individual integrated circuits.
References
1. Mul’tiprocessornye sistemy i parallel’nye vychisleniya /Pod red. F.G.Enslou. – M.: Mir, 1976.
2. Leibowitz B (1977) Distributed processing. International Computing, Bethesda. – Madrid,
1977.
3. Farber DJ, Larson KC (1972) The system architecture of the distributed computer system—the
communications system. In: Symposium on computer-communications networks and teletrafic,
Polytechnics Institute of Brooklyn, April 4–6
4. Foster JD (1976) The development of concept for distributive processing/COMPCON. San-
Francisco, CA
5. Vejcman K (1982) Raspredelennye sistemy mini- i mikroEVM /Per. s angl. V.I.SHyaudkulisa
i V.A.SHaposhnikova; Pod red. G.P.Vasil’eva. - M.: Fi-nansy i statistika,1982. – 382s.
6. Lorin G (1984) Raspredelennye vychislitel’nye sistemy /Per. s angl. V.A.Antropova; Pod red.
E.V.Evreinova. – M.: Radio i svyaz’, 1984. – 296s.
7. Evreinov EV, Horoshevskij VG (1978) Odnorodnye vychislitel’nye siste-my. – M.: Nauka
– 319s
8. Golubev-Novozhilov YUS (1967) Mnogomashinnye kompleksy vychislitel’nyh sredstv. – M.:
Sov. radio. – 424s
9. Evreinov EV, Kosarev YUG (1966) Odnorodnye universal’nye vychisli-tel’nye sistemy vysokoj
proizvoditel’nosti. – Novosibirsk, Nauka – 308s.
10. Pospelov DA (1972) Vvedenie v teoriyu vychislitel’nyh sistem. – M.: Sov..radio – 183s.
11. Drozdov EA, Pyatibratov AP (1973) Osnovy postroeniya i funkcionirova-niya vychislitel’nyh
sistem. – M.: Energiya – 368s.
12. Kalyaev AV (1970) Teoriya cifrovyh integriruyushchih mashin i struktur. – M.: Sov. radio
– 471s.
13. Kalyaev AV (1978) Odnorodnye kommutiruyushchie registrovye struktury. – M.: Sov. radio
– 334s.
References 215
14. Korneev VV (1985) Arhitektura vychislitel’nyh sistem s programmiruemoj strukturoj. – M.;

Nauka – 168s.
15. Balashov EP, Smolov VB, Petrov PB, Puzankov DV (1978) Mnogofunkcional’nye regulyarnye
vychislitel’nye struktury. – M.: Sov. radio – 288s.
16. Evreinov EV (1965) Teoreticheskie osnovy postroeniya universal’nyh vy-chislitel’nyh sred /V
kn.: Vychislitel’nye sistemy. Vyp.16. – Novosibirsk – S.3–72.
17. Evreinov EV, Prangishvili IV (1974) Cifrovye avtomaty s nastraivae-moj strukturoj
(Odnorodnye sredy). – M.: Energiya – 240s.
18. Evreinov EV (1981) Odnorodnye vychislitel’nye sistemy, struktury i sre-dy. – M.: Radio i
svyaz’– 208s.
19. Wollcott P (1993) Sovjet advanced technology: the case of high-performance computing. Ph.D.
Dissertation, University of Arizona
20. Goodman P, Wollcott P, Burkhart G (1995) Building on the basics: an examination of high-
performance computing export control policy in the 1990s. Centre for International Security
and Arms Control, Stanford University, p 78
21. Evreinov EV (1965) Universal’nye vychislitel’nye sistemy s chastichno peremennoj strukturoj
/V kn.: Vychislitel’nye sistemy, vyp.17. – No-vosibirsk, 1965. - S.3–60.
22. Dimitriev YUK, Horoshevskij VG (1982) Vychislitel’nye sistemy iz mini-EVM. – M.: Radio
i svyaz’ -304s.
23. Horoshevskij VG (1987) Inzhenernyj analiz funkcionirovaniya vychisli-tel’nyh mashin i
sistem. – M.: Radio i svyaz’ – 256s.
24. Mamzelev IA (1987) Vychislitel’nye sistemy v tekhnike svyazi. – M.: Radio i svyaz’ – 240s.
25. Chazelle B (1984) Computation Geometry on a Systolic Chip //IEEE Trans. Comput. – Vol.33,
№9. - P.774–783.
26. Korneev VV, Kiselev AV (1998) Sovremennye mikroprocessory. – M.: Izd. «Nolidzh» – 240s
27. Golovkin BA (1980) Parallel’nye vychislitel’nye sistemy. – M.: Nauka
28. Hokkni R, Dzhesskhoup K (1986) Parallel’nye EVM. Arhitektura, programmi-rovanie i
algoritmy. – M.: Radio i svyaz’
29. Sistemy parallel’noj obrabotki: Per. s angl. /Pod red. D.Ivensa. – M.: Mir, 1985
30. Matov VI, Belousov YUA, Fedoseev EP (1988) Bortovye cifrovye vychis-litel’nye mashiny i
sistemy /Pod red. V.I.Matova. – M.: Vysshaya shkola
31. Kovalenko AE, Gula VV (1986) Otkazoustojchivye mikroprocessornye si-stemy. – Kiev:
Tekhnika – 150s.
32. Puhov GE, Samojlov VD, Aristov VV (1974) Avtomatizirovannye analogo-cifrovye ustrojstva
modelirovaniya. – Kiev: Tekhnika
33. Glushkov VM, Myasnikov VA, Ignat’ev MB, Torgashev VA (1977) Rekursiv-nye vychis-
litel’nye mashiny. – M.– 36s. – (Preprint/IT MVT AN SSSR)
34. Smith JE, Sohi GS (1995) The microarchitecture of superscaler processors. Proc IEEE
83(12):1609–1622
35. Sohi JE, Breach TN, Vijakumar (1995) Multiscaler processors. In: ISCA’95, Santa Margherita,
Ligure, Italy, pp 414–425
36. Obrabotka signalov v radiotekhnicheskih sistemah blizhnej navigacii /G.A.Paholkov,
G.E.Zbrickaya, YU.T.Krivoruchko, B.V.Ponomarenko, YU.G.SHatrakov. – M.: Radio i svyaz’,
– 256s
37. Vereshchaka AI, Olyanyuk PV (1996) Aviacionnoe oborudovanie: Ucheb. dlya stud. vuzov
grazhd. aviacii. – M.: Transport, 1996
38. Vychislitel’nye sistemy. – Novosibirsk: IM SO AN SSSR, vyp.1–100, 1962–1983g.g
39. Iodan E (1979) Strukturnoe proektirovanie i konstruirovanie programm. – M.: Mir
radioelektronnogo kompleksa. Radiotekhnika 5:18–22
tronnogo kompleksa. Radiotekhnika 9:49–54
42. ASAAC Phase 1: ASAAC Feasibility Study: Core Architecture Concept Definition, ASAAC:
02, Issue 4, Fe.1994
43. Kulabuhov VS (1996) Variant oblika i arhitektury ergaticheskogo integri-rovannogo bortovogo

kompleksa letatel’nyh apparatov. Radiotekhnika 9:65–69
44. Halamov ASS, Bukov VN, Kulabuhov VS, Guzenko VG (1998) Nauchnye problemy komplek-
snyh issledovanij v oblasti sozdaniya i ekspluatacii bortovogo oborudovaniya LA na baze
informacionno-vychislitel’nyh setej. Nauch. vestnik MTGU GA. Ser. Avionika. – №3.
– S.59–74
45. Kulabuhov VS, Merkulov VA, CHigin GP (1999) Oblik mnogourovnevoj in-formacionnoj
sistemy bazovogo bortovogo kompleksa perspektivnyh letatel’nyh apparatov. Izvestiya RAN.
Teoriya i sistemy upravleniya. – №3. – S.146–152
46. Turchak A (1996) Arhitektura i osnovnye apparaturno- programmnye moduli kompleksa
aviacionnogo bortovogo oborudovaniya pyatogo pokoleniya. Mir avioniki. - №6.
47. Evgenov AV (2003) Napravleniya razvitiya integrirovannyh kompleksov bor-tovogo oboru-
dovaniya samoletov grazhdanskoj aviacii. Aviakosmicheskoe priborostroenie.-№3. – S.48–53.
48. Turchak AA, CHernyshov EE, Mihajluca KT, Hejnin YUES (2002) Arhitektura vychis-
litel’nyh sistem dlya integrirovannoj modul’noj avioniki perspektivnyh letatel’nyh appa-
ratov. Radiosistemy. Radioelektronnye kompleksy, 2002, №2. – S.87–95 (ZHurnal v zhurnale
«Radiotekhnika». – 2002. - №9).
49. Mesarovich M, Mako D, Takahara I (1973) Teoriya ierarhicheskih mnogourov-nevyh sistem.-
M.: Mir. – 344s.
50. Brooks FP (1062) Architectural philosophy. In: Buchholz W (ed) Planning a computer system.
McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 5–16
51. Zemanek H (1973) Formal definition and generalized architecture. In: Ross M (ed) Operations
research.1972. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 59–73
52. Blaauw GA (1972) Computer architecture. Electronische Rechenanlagen 14(4):154–159
53. ISO/IEC 7498-1 (1994) Information technology—Open Systems Interconnection – Basic
Reference Model
54. Gromov GN, Paholkov GA (1980) Principy organizacii kompleksov bortovo-go samoletnogo
oborudovaniya, obespechivayushchih povyshenie effektiv-nosti i nadezhnosti resheniya zadach
navigacii, posadki i UVD //Voprosy radioelektroniki. Ser.OT. – Vyp.4. – 3–15.
55. Solomatin NM, Hertvitis RP, Makshancev MM (1987) Vybor mikroEVM dlya informacionnyh
sistem. – M.: Vyssh.shk. – 120s.
56. Balashov EP, Puzankov DV (1981) Mikroprocessory i mikroprocessornye sistemy. – M.: Radio
i svyaz’. – 328s
57. Balashov EP, Grigor’ev VL, Petrov GA (1984) Mikro- i mini-EVM. – L.: Energoatomizdat,
Leningr.otd-nie. – 376s.
58. Nesterov PV (1984) Mikroprocessory. Arhitektura i ee ocenka /Pod red. L.N.Presnuhina. – M.:
Vysshaya shkola. – 104s.
59. Majers G (1985) Arhitektura sovremennyh EVM: V 2-h kn. Kn.1 /Per. s angl. – M.: Mir, 1985.
– 364s
60. Boule D, Hewish M (1990) Avionics for the future. Defense Electronics & Computing 2:53–55
61. Koblov VL, YArlykov MS (1987) Principy postroeniya radioelektronnyh kompleksov inte-
gral’nogo tipa. Radiotekhnika 2:20–28
62. YArlykov MS (1995) Radioelektronnye kompleksy – sovremennyj etap raz-vitiya
radiotekhniki. Radiotekhnika 4–5:134–136
63. Baburov VI, Ponomarenko BV (2005) Principy vybora funkcional’nyh zadach i arhitek-
tury bortovogo integrirovannogo oborudovaniya navi-gacii, posadki, obmena dannymi i UVD
//Nauch. vestnik Mosk. gos. tekhn. un-ta grazhdanskoj aviacii. Ser. Radiofizika i radiotekhnika.
- №93.
64. Vityazev VV (1993) Cifrovaya chastotnaya selekciya signalov. – M.: Radio i svyaz’. – 240s.
65. SHleev SE (1999) Elementnaya baza i arhitektura cifrovyh radiopriemnyh ustrojstv. Cifrovaya
obrabotka signalov 1:36–47
References 217
66. Poberezhskij ES (1987) Cifrovye radiopriemnye ustrojstva. – M.: Radio i svyaz’,. – 184s.
67. Lukin NS (1998) Bortovye funkcional’no-orientirovannye processory s parallel’noj obrabotkoj
dannyh. Giroskopiya i navigaciya 6:56–66
68. Vodyaho AI, Smolov VB, Plyusnin VU, Puzankov DV (1988) Funkcional’no-orientirovannye
processory /; Pod red. V.B.Smolova. – L.: Mashinostroenie. Leningr. otd-nie. – 224s.
Chapter 5
Functions of the Integrated Airborne
Equipment Navigation, Landing, Data
Exchange and ATC
The functional tasks of integrated avionics for navigation, landing, data exchange
and air traffic control, described in Chap. 3, constitute the upper, most general, level
of functional structure of the integrated avionics. The second level of the functional
structure consists of the system functions, which are determined by the signal and data
processing algorithms, control and monitoring, as well as communication protocols
with the airborne systems external to the avionics.
The main functions of the system that determine the quality of solving functional
problems in the considered avionics are procedures of shaping and processing signals
and data processing. From the radiotechnical point of view, the same signal and data
processing procedures as in a single-function avionics providing the same processing
quality should be performed in hardware integrated avionics. Their theoretical struc-
ture should not depend on the way information is transformed (hardware, software
and hardware or software conversion). Another thing is that the use of powerful
airborne computational tools instead of hardware implementation characteristic of
the first- and second-generation avionics allows us to implement more advanced
signal processing algorithms against the background of noise and data processing
algorithms.
In order to present the diversity of signal generation and signal processing algo-
rithms in integrated avionics, consider the requirements for processing units from the
point of view of the main characteristics of the systems in which avionics should work
and basic operations on signals and data in existing single-function avionics. This
analysis allows us to formulate the requirements for the processors of the shaping
and processing of signals of the integrated avionics.
The principles of operation of most of the navigation, landing and air traffic control
systems under consideration, apart from PRMG, MCD and the “Rendezvous” mode,
and their main characteristics are described, for example, in [1, 2]. The signal formats
of these systems and their requirements are standardized by ICAO [3–5] and NLGS-
3 [6]. Therefore, the following are only information about the systems needed to
describe signal processing in avionics. The descriptions of the signals of satellite
220 5 Functions of the Integrated Airborne Equipment Navigation …
radio navigation systems GPS, GLONASS and their processing algorithms are not
given, as they are described in detail in the literature [3, 7–9].
5.1 ILS/MB Signal Processing
5.1.1 ILS Instrument Landing System
The ILS instrument landing system (SP-70, SP-75, SP-80) consists of three main
components: a localiser VHF radio beacon, a glide slope UHF radio beacon and a
VHF marker beacon (MB).
The localiser beacon operates in the range of 108–111.975 MHz. When one
high-frequency carrier is used, the frequency tolerance is no more than ±0.005%.
When two carrier high frequencies are used, the frequency tolerance does not exceed
0.002%, and the nominal frequency band occupied by the carriers is located symmet-
rically on either side of the assigned frequency. With all applicable tolerances, the
separation of two carrier frequencies is not less than 5 kHz and not more than 14 kHz.
The number of working frequency channels is 40. The interval between neigh-
boring frequency channels is 50 kHz.
The localiser radio beacon of the ILS systems (SP-70, SP-75, SP-80) is a two-
channel beacon having a “narrow” (NC) and “wide” (WC) information transmission
channels. The channels operate at frequencies separated by 9.5 kHz. The radio beacon
is built on the principle of a radio beacon “with reference zero." The course line is
formed by a NC antenna system, which emits two VHF signals: amplitude modulated
with modulation frequencies of 90 Hz and 150 Hz and balanced modulated, whose
lateral frequencies are shifted in phase by 180. The depth of amplitude modulation
is m = 20%.
The informative parameter is the difference in the modulation depths DMD =
M1 − M2 , where M1 and M2 are the spatial modulation depth coefficients.
The resulting radiation pattern (RP) of the antenna system has two non-intersecting
lobes located on both sides of the course line. To the left of the course line (in the
direction of landing approach), the aircraft receives NC and WC signals modulated
by oscillations with a frequency of 90 Hz, on the right, by a frequency of 150 Hz.
The resulting RP in the azimuthal plane determines the position of the surface
with a zero value of the difference in depth of modulation (DDM = 0), which coin-
cides with the course line. The NC zone covers a sector of ±6°. To obtain airborne
information about the deviation side at angles to the course line up to ± 35°, a wide
channel (clearance channel) is used. Nam antennas of this channel are created by the
same modulated oscillations.
The signal processing of the localiser beacon of the ILS systems (SP-70, SP-75,
SP-80) in the existing equipment (Fig. 5.1) is carried out by a receiver, consisting of
a receiver and a DSP.
5.1 ILS/MB Signal Processing 221
Аmplitude
detection
Digital signal
Digital signal Digital signal Digital marker
filtering
filtering filtering signal filtering
telephone
FM1 = 90 Гц FM2 = 150 Гц communication
and identification
signals
Amplitude Amplitude
Shaping of Shaping of
measurement measurement
analog beacon telephone
recognition output signals
signals
Computing of
differences in
modulation
depths
Smoothing of
differences in
modulation
depths
Shaping
automating
gain control
signals
Fig. 5.1 Block diagram of the signal processing algorithm ILS/MB
The receiver is implemented on a superheterodyne circuit. The received signal

using the receiver’s AGC is normalized relative to the carrier voltage, and the output
of the detector is affected by voltages with frequencies of 90 Hz and 150 Hz, the
amplitudes of which are proportional to M1 and M2. These voltages are separated
by subchannels of the selection of signals of 90 Hz and 150 Hz and are extracted
by the detectors and fed to the comparison circuit. The signal from the output of the
latter is proportional to the DDM.
The signal at the inputs of the course subchannels allocation includes:
• signals of 90 Hz and 150 Hz, the amplitudes of each of which can be from 60 to
975 mV. The total amplitude is from 120 to 975 mV. Simultaneous frequency drift
of signals by ± 2% is allowed while maintaining the 3: frequency ratio. The phase
departure of the signals of 90 Hz and 150 Hz relative to a common subharmonic
of 30 Hz is no more than ± 20°;
• identification signal with frequency (1020 ± 50) Hz with amplitude up to 190 mV;
• telephone signal in the frequency range from 300 to 3000 Hz with amplitude up
to 630 mV; maximum ratio of the amplitude of the signal 90 Hz or 150 Hz to the
amplitude of the telephone signal 5:1;
• signal with frequency from 3 to 5 kHz with amplitude up to 600 mV;
• harmonic components of signals of 90 Hz and 150 Hz: the second harmonic does
not exceed 5%, the third harmonic −7%;
• noise with a rms value of not more than 13 mV and a uniform energy spectrum
in the frequency band from 0 to 20 kHz.
• All amplitude data in existing equipment are provided for orientation.
• Subchannel signal extraction should provide the following characteristics:
• subchannel transfer coefficients for both frequencies must be equal (7.92 ± 0.08)
and not dependent on the amplitude of the input signals;
• the additional error of the subchannel transmission coefficient should not exceed
4% when the signal frequency changes to 90 Hz and 150 Hz by ± 2%, while
the difference in the transmission coefficient between the subchannels is no more
than ±1.3%.
Subchannels should provide:
• attenuation of the mutual influence of signals of 90 Hz and 150 Hz by at least
40 dB; the difference of the suppression coefficients should not exceed 0.002;
• attenuation of the third harmonics of the emitted signal by no less than 26 dB;
• attenuation of all other interfering signals by less than 40 dB;
• The difference of the suppression coefficients should not exceed 0.0018;
• The time constant of the subchannel should be no more than 0.085 s.
• In subchannels, after filtering, constant voltages equal to the amplitudes of signals
of 90 Hz and 150 Hz are distinguished.
ILS localiser beacons simultaneously with the transmission of navigation infor-
mation provide the transmission of an identification signal on the same carrier or
carriers of high frequency, which are used to perform the main function of the
localiser beacon. The signal is produced by modulating one or two carriers with
a tone frequency (1020 ± 50) Hz. The modulation depth is from 0.05 to 0.15.
An international Morse code (two or three letters) is used to transmit the iden-
tification signal. The transfer rate is about seven words per minute. ILS categories
I and II localiser beacons can simultaneously with the transmission of navigation
and identification signals ensure the operation of the ground-to-air radiotelephone
communication channel. The channel is formed on the same carrier or high-frequency
carriers, which are used for the main function. The maximum modulation depth of
the carriers is 0.5. The ratio of the maximum modulation depth during the opera-
tion of the radiotelephone channel to the peak modulation depth of the identification
signal is approximately 9:1.
The sum of the modulation components of the radiotelephone channel signals,
navigation and identification signals does not exceed 0.95.
The sound frequency characteristics of a radiotelephone communication channel
should be flat within 3 dB relative to the 1000 Hz level in the range of 300–3000 Hz.
The identification signals and radiotelephone signals are separated by a bandpass

filter tuned to the frequencies indicated above. After the bandpass filter, the tele-
phone communication and identification signals are fed to the input of the power
amplifier, which amplifies the telephone signals in power. The telephone signal after
the power amplifier is converted by a single-period rectifier into a constant voltage
and compared with a threshold element with a given level and also supplied to the
aircraft intercom.
5.1.2 Glide Slope Beacon
The glide slope beacon operates in the range of 328.6–335.4 MHz. When a single
high-frequency carrier is used, the frequency tolerance does not exceed 0.005%.
When two-carrier glide slope systems are used, the frequency tolerance does not
exceed 0.002%, and the nominal frequency band occupied by the carriers is symmetri-
cally located on either side of the assigned frequency. With all applicable tolerances,
the frequency separation of the carriers is not less than 4 kHz and not more than
32 kHz.
The number of working frequency channels is 40. The interval between neigh-
boring frequency channels is 150 kHz.
Glide slope radio beacon of ILS systems (SP-70, SP-75, SP-80) is a two-channel
beacon having a “narrow” and “wide” channels. The frequency spacing between them
is 18 kHz. The radio beacon is built on the principle of a radio beacon with “reference
zero.” The glide path is formed by an antenna system that emits two signals: through
a two-lobe lower antenna, an amplitude-modulated modulation frequency of 90 Hz
and 150 Hz, and through a single-lobe upper antenna, a balanced modulated signal
with the same modulation frequencies.
The depth of amplitude modulation is m 1 = m 2 = m = 0.40; the range of change
is 0.75–0.425. Tolerances on modulation frequencies of 90 Hz and 150 Hz: for ILS
category I—2.5%, for ILS category II—1.5%, for ILS category III—1%. The total
harmonic content in the frequency signals of 150 Hz and 90 Hz is not more than
10%.
The informative parameter is the difference in the depth of modulation DDM =
M1 − M2. The line of the glide path corresponds to the angle, with which the DDM
= 0. Wide channel signals are different from the main carrier frequency, modulated
at 150 Hz and provide position indication for corners. The signals of the glide slope
beacon with radiation compensation at small angles to the horizon, formed by three
antennas, have a similar structure.
The signal processing of the glide slope of the ILS beacon (SP-70, SP-75, SP-80)
in the existing equipment is carried out by a receiving device consisting of a receiver
and a signal processing process.
The receiver device is implemented on a superheterodyne circuit. The received
signal is processed in the same way as in the course receiver. After the mixer, the
signal is fed to the input of the polo filter.
The signal at the inputs of glide path selection contains:

• 90 Hz and 150 Hz signals, the amplitude of each of which can be from 60 to
1250 mV. The total amplitude is from 120 to 1250 mV. Simultaneous frequency
drift of signals by ±2% is allowed while maintaining the 3: 5 frequency ratio. The
phase departure of signals of 90 and 150 Hz relative to a common subharmonic
of 30 Hz is no more than ±20°;
• signal with frequency from 4 to 20 kHz with amplitude up to 600 mV;
• harmonic components of signals of 90 and 150 Hz: the second harmonic does not
exceed 5%, the third −7%;
• noise with a standard deviation of not more than 14 mV and a uniform energy
spectrum in the frequency band from 0 to 20 kHz.
All data on the amplitudes are given for orientation.
Subchannel signal extraction should provide the following characteristics:
• Subchannel transfer coefficients for both frequencies should be equal (3.96 ± 0.4)
and not dependent on the amplitude of the input signals.
• The additional error of the transmission ratio of the subchannels should not exceed
4% when the signal frequency changes to 90 Hz and 150 Hz by ±2%, while the
difference in the transmission coefficient between the subchannels is no more than
±1.3%.
• The remaining requirements are the same as in the course channel.
• In subchannels, after filtering, constant voltages equal to the amplitudes of signals
of 90 Hz and 150 Hz are distinguished.
5.1.3 Marker Beacons
Marker beacons operate at a frequency of (75.0 ± 0.00375) MHz. The signal is a

continuous carrier modulated by a tone signal with a modulation depth of at least
0.95 and at most 1.0. The total content of modulation harmonics does not exceed
15%. Frequency tone signal:
• near (internal) radio marker—(3000 ± 75) Hz;
• average radio marker—(1300 ± 33) Hz;
• far (external) radio marker—(400 ± 10) Hz.
Carrier radiation is carried out without interruption. The modulation of sound

frequencies is as follows:
• near radio marker—continuous transmission of 6 points per second;
• average radio marker—a continuous series of alternating points and a dash, with
the dash being transmitted at a speed of two dashes per second, and the points at
a speed of six points per second;
• far radio marker—continuous transmission of two dashes per second.
Signal processing in the existing equipment is carried out by the receiving device
implemented according to the superheterodyne circuit. Intermediate frequency f =
10.7 MHz. The preselector filter must protect the receiver from interfering signals
(AM and FM broadcasting signals, television signal) that fall within the range of
the mirror reception channel and under-pressure interference outside the operating
frequency range to the level safe from the point view of multiplicative clutter.
Preselector characteristics:
• center frequency (75,000 ± 2.25) kHz;
• bandwidth level minus 3 dB—(32 ± 4.5) kHz;
• attenuation in the passband no more than 14 dB;
• squareness factor CRC not more than 3;
• attenuation in the delay band of at least 60 dB.
The receiver’s intermediate frequency amplifier is covered by AGC. The low-
frequency part of the receiver consists of three active filters that are tuned to modula-
tion frequencies of 400, 1300 and 3000 Hz, detectors, threshold devices and electronic
switches, which ensure the activation of light signaling and the formation of signals
entering the ILS signal processor.
5.2 VOR Signal Processing
There are two types of radio beacons: standard VOR and Doppler VOR (DVOR). A
standard VOR emits a high-frequency carrier with two separate modulating frequen-
cies of 30 Hz. One of these modulating frequencies is such that its phase does not
depend on the azimuth of the observation point (reference phase). The other modu-
lating frequency is such that its phase at the observation point (variable phase) differs
from the reference phase of the first modulating frequency by an angle equal to the
bearing of the observation point relative to the VOR location.
The variable phase signal is transmitted using amplitude modulation (azimuth
signal). The phase reference signal modulates the frequency of the subcarrier with
an average frequency of 9960 Hz (reference signal). Subcarriers FM modulate the
amplitude of the oscillation of the carrier frequency of the beacon.
The signal at the receiving point is
u = Um [1 + m sin(t − A) + m i sin(ωi t − m xi cos t)] sin ω0 t,
where ω0 is the carrier frequency; is the circular frequency of the antenna; /2π
= (30 ± 0.3) Hz; ω/Pi /2π = (9960.0 ± 99.6) Hz; m = 0.28–0.32—the depth of the
amplitude modulation carrier signal of 30 Hz; m = 0.28–0.32 is the modulation
depth of the carrier caused by the subcarrier; m f m = 15–17—frequency modulation
index; A—phase proportional to the azimuth of the aircraft.
The processing of standard VOR signals in the existing equipment (Fig. 5.2) up to
and including the detector is the same as for the ILS course channel. The unevenness
Amplitude
detection
Digital filtering Digital filtering Digital filtering Digital filtering

of сигнала of сигнала of of telephone
переменной опорной фазы identification signals
фазы signals
Signal
Shaping of Shaping of
limitation
analog output
recognition telephone
signals signals
Phase Frequency
measurement detection
(azimuth)
Smoothing of
azimuth
Fig. 5.2 Block diagram of the VOR signal processing algorithm
of the frequency response of the receiver in the ±18 kHz band should be no more than
minus 6 dB. Filter F-1 selects a variable phase signal, which after the amplifier is fed
to the phase discriminator of the phase meter. Filter F-2 selects the reference signal,
which passes a suppressor-amplifier, which cuts off the amplitude modulation, and
is fed to a frequency detector, where the signal of the reference phase is output, fed
further to the phase meter. The phase meter determines the phase that is numerically
equal to the azimuth of the receiving point. As an F-2 filter, a synchronous filter is
used.
Doppler VOR is based on the formation of the FM signal with a center frequency
of 9960 Hz, in the phase of the modulating oscillation of which with a frequency of
30 Hz contains information about the azimuth of the receiving point (variable phase
signal). The reference phase signal is transmitted by amplitude modulation with a
frequency of 30 Hz. The signal at the reception point is identical in structure to the
signal of a standard VOR with the difference that the information about azimuth A
lies in the phase of the FM oscillation. For processing such a signal, the circuit of
Fig. 5.2 is suitable, on the frequency detector of which, in this case, the azimuth
signal is selected, and the reference phase signal passes through filter F-1.
If simultaneously with the fulfillment of its main function, VOR provides a
ground-to-air communication channel, then such communication is carried out on
the same high-frequency carrier. Peak modulation depth of the HF carrier of the
5.2 VOR Signal Processing 227
communication channel is not more than 0.30. The sound frequencies of the radiotele-
phone channel are within 3 dB relative to the level of 1000 Hz over the entire range
(300–3000) Hz.
The VOR beacon provides simultaneous transmission of an identification signal on
the same carrier that is used to provide the navigation function. For the transmission
of identification signals, an international Morse code is applied using two or three
letters. This signal is transmitted at a speed corresponding to approximately seven
words per minute. It repeats at least every 30 s; the modulation tone frequency is
(1020 ± 50) Hz. The modulation depth of the carrier identification signal is not more
than 10%.
The processing of identification signals and radiotelephone communication is
performed in the same way as when the airborne equipment is operating with the
ILS system.
5.3 Shaping and Processing of DME Signals
5.3.1 DME Equipment
The DME includes a radio beacon (transponder) and aircraft equipment (interrogator
and meter). The DME works on a “request-response” basis. Information about the
range is enclosed in the time interval between the moments of radiation from an
airplane of the interrogator signal (IS) and the moment of reception of the transponder
signal (TS). The signals IS and TS are transmitted at different frequencies using
different from each other codes (frequency-code division of signals).
Frequency range: airborne transmitter (1025–1150) MHz; airborne receiver (960–
1215) MHz.
The total number of frequency-code channels is 352. The interval between
frequency channels is 1 MHz. The frequency stability of the carrier airborne
transmitter is ± 100 kHz.
There are three modifications of DME equipment: DME/N (with “narrow spec-
tral characteristics,” DME/W (with “broad spectral characteristics”), DME/P (“P”—
accurate measurement of range). DME/P equipment operates in modes IA (initial
approach) (FA final approach). DME/P spectral characteristics in mode IA are the
same as in DME/N. DME/W modification is rarely used.
DME equipment can work in conjunction with ILS, MLS or VOR.
The shape of the DME pulse envelope for requests and responses is given in (See
Ref. [66] in Chap. 2).
For DME/N and DME/P, the spectrum of a pulse-modulated signal is such that,
within a pulse duration, the effective radiated power in the 0.5 MHz frequency band
with a center frequency shifted 0.8 MHz above and below the nominal channel
frequency, in both cases, it does not exceed 200 mW, and the effective radiated power
in the 0.5 MHz frequency band with the center frequency shifted 2 MHz above and
below the nominal channel frequency does not exceed 2 mW in both cases. The pulse
duration is measured between the points on the front and the pulse decay at a level
of 0.05 A.
The power in the frequency bands indicated above is the average power during the
transmission of a pulse. The average power in a given frequency band is the energy
in a given frequency band divided by the transmission time of the pulse.
DME signals are transmitted in pairs of pulses. The intervals between the pulses
forming a pair are given in [3]. Pulse spacing tolerances: for DME/N ± 0.5 µs, for
DME/P ± 0.25 µs.
The repetition frequency of the request pulses:
• for DME/N: up to 150 pulse pairs per second in search, up to 30 pulse pairs
per second in tracking (if tracking was not provided for 30 s, then the repetition
frequency of pulse pairs does not exceed 30 pairs per second);
• for DME/P: up to 40 pairs per second in search, up to 5 pairs per second. with
sa-pray on the ground, up to 16 pairs per second in tracking mode IA; up to 40
pairs per second in tracking mode FA.
5.3.2 DME Signal Processing
The processing of signals in the existing equipment (Fig. 5.3) is performed by

the interrogator, consisting of the transmitting, receiving devices and the signal
processing processor. The interrogator can be in the following modes: search;
tracking; precision measurement; scan; memory; sound identification; control;
reservations.
When working with the MLS system, the interrogator can be in the modes of
normal (IA) or precision (FA) measurements. Mode IA completely coincides with
the navigation mode. The working frequency-code channel and modes are set from
external systems.
Outside the range of the ground beacon, the interrogator is in redundancy mode, in
which response signals can be received, but the interrogation signals are not emitted.
The response signals received by the antenna-feeder device of the interrogator are
fed to the input of the receiver’s bandpass filter. The band filter limits the band of
received signals to the working range (960–1215) MHz and prevents the occurrence
of side reception channels outside this range. Next, the signal passes through a high-
frequency amplifier, providing the necessary sensitivity. Suppression of the mirror
and other closely located channels of side reception provides a narrowband bandpass
filter. Next, the signal is converted in the mixer to an intermediate frequency of
63 MHz, amplified in an intermediate frequency amplifier (IFA 1), covered by an
AGC circuit.
After the IFA, the signal passes through a concentrated selection filter (CSF) with
a bandwidth of 3.5 MHz, which ensures the selectivity of the receiver according to
the norms of the broadband channel. After the CSF, the signal is amplified mainly
by the IFA 2, which also has a gain control. This IFA has two outputs, the signals of
which are fed to broadband and narrowband channels.
5.3 Shaping and Processing of DME Signals 229
Fig. 5.3 Block diagram of Amplitude

DME signal processing detection
algorithm Mode IA Mode FA
Filtration Filtration
(Δf = 0,8 МГц) (Δf = 3,5 МГц)
Pulse Pulse
amplitude amplitude
Fixing Fixing
temporary temporary
shaking of shaking of
pulses by level pulses by level
0,5 А 0,1 А
Amplitude and
Selection
duration
of duration
selection
Signal
decoding
Shaping Search and

receiver gain response
control signals detection
Range In signal shaper

measurement
Range
filtering
Shaping of From signal shaper

control signals
for query
frequency and
synthesizer
switching In the synthesizer
There is a second CSF with a bandwidth of 3.5 MHz in the broadband channel,
and in the narrowband channel, there is a CSF with a bandwidth of 0.8 MHz. After
them, the signals are amplified in additional stages of the IFA and detected. The
detectors include a low-pass signal filter with a video signal that has 0.4 MHz and
1.75 MHz for narrowband and wideband signals. After the detectors, the signals go
through the video amplifier to the analog processing device.
Depending on the mode IA or FA, signals in this device enter the input of a
temporary fixation circuit at a level of 0.5 amplitude or a temporary fixation scheme
at a level of 0.1 amplitude. The 0.5 A level fixation scheme produces a rectangular
impulse, the leading edge of which is tied in time to the point “b” of the leading
edge of the input pulse. This rectangular pulse passes through a pulse selector with a
duration that passes only pulses that have a duration longer than 2.5 µs to the output.
In addition, the passage of the signal to the output of the selector is allowed by the
signal from the output of the selector in amplitude, which is generated only if the
amplitude of the signal pulse exceeds a predetermined threshold value.
The 0.1A fixation scheme produces a rectangular pulse, the leading edge of which
is tied to the “h” point of the input signal. A pulse from the output of this circuit
also passes through a pulse selector in duration, which transmits pulses of more than
2 µs to its output. The pulses of the fixation circuit, at a level of 0.5 A, from the
output of the pulse selector are fed to a decoder, producing decoded pulses, if the
time interval between the input pulses of the decoder corresponds to the time interval
of the specified code. Decoded pulses enter the range meter.
The requirements for the decoder are common for DME/N and DME/P: the
decoder suppresses the response of a pair of pulses with an interval between pulses
different from the nominal value of ±2 µs or more, and at any signal level exceeding
up to 42 dB receiver sensitivity.
In the range meter, sequential search and detection of response signals are
currently implemented. Algorithm consists of two stages and boils down to the
following. At the first stage, a stop is made at a temporary position where the first
impulse response or noise at the distance of the impulse took place, and the gate is
set. The transition to the second stage occurs when a pulse appears in the strobe. In
the absence of a pulse in the strobe, the next pulse is processed at a distance and the
strobe is set from it. The second stage is the sequential Wald procedure (the presence
of a pulse in the strobe is the addition of “2” to the detection counter, the absence—the
subtraction of “1”). The detection threshold is the number 8 in the detection counter,
after which the tracking mode is set. The removal of the tracking mode occurs in the
absence of 7 response pulses in a row through the memory mode.
To filter data in tracking mode or to prepare it when working in memory mode, the
following second-order filter with constant coefficients α and β, depending on the
operating mode of the range finder, is implemented by software. In the “Navigation”
α = 1/4, β = 1/32; in the mode of “Landing” α = 1/8, β = 1/128.
Accuracy requirements DME: the interrogator does not add with a probability of
0.95:
• For DME/N—the total system error is more than ±315 m (±0.17 mi).
• For DME/P mode IA—the total error of the PFE system is more than ± 30 m
(±100 ft), the total error of the CMN system is more than ±10 m (±33 ft).
• For DME/P mode FA accuracy standard 1—the total error of the PFE system is
more than ± 15 m (±50 ft), and the total error of the CMN system is more than
± 10 m (±33 ft).
• For DME/P mode FA accuracy standard 2—the total error of the PFE system is
more than ±7 m (±23 ft), and the total error of the CMN system is more than
±7 m (±23 ft).
5.3 Shaping and Processing of DME Signals 231
5.3.3 Identification of DME Transponders
Identification of transponders. All DME transponders (radio beacons) transmit an

identification signal in one of the following ways:
• “independent” identification, which is the transmission of coded identification
pulses (international Morse code);
• an “interworking” signal, which can be used by transponders that interact with a
VOR or MLS, which themselves transmit an identification signal.
Both identification systems use signals that consist of a series of paired pulses
transmitted over a certain period of time with a repetition rate of 1350 pairs per
second, temporarily replacing the response pulses that would normally be transmitted
in this time interval. Response impulses are transmitted between manipulation time
periods. For DME/P, the impulse response pairs in the FA mode must also be trans-
mitted during the manipulation time periods and take precedence over the impulse
identification pairs.
The “independent” identification signal has the following characteristics:
• The identification signal consists of identification pulses transmitted by a radio-
lighthouse code in the form of dots and a dash (international Morse code) with a
frequency of at least once every 40 s and at a speed of at least 6 words per minute.
• The characteristics of the identification code and the transmission rate of the
letters of the DME transponder correspond to the following provisions so that
the maximum total duration of activation does not exceed 5 s per group of the
identification code. The duration of the points is from 0.1 to 0.16 s. The duration
of the dash is usually 3 times longer than the duration of the points. The pause
between points and/or dash is equal to the duration of one point ±10%. The pause
between letters or numbers is not less than the length of three points. The entire
period of transfer of the group identification code does not exceed 10 s.
A tone identification signal is transmitted at a repetition rate of 1350 pulses per
second.
The signal of “interactive” identification has the following characteristics:
• When interacting with VOR or MLS, identification is transmitted in the form
of dots and dashes (international Morse code), as indicated above, and is
synchronized with the VOR or MLS code.
• Each 40-s interval is divided into four or more equal periods, with the transponder
identification signal being transmitted during only one period, and the identifica-
tion signal VOR and MLS—during the remaining periods.
• For a DME transponder communicating with the MLS, the authentication signal
is the last three letters of the MLS authentication code.
5.4 MLS Signal Processing
The MLS system is designed to serve a large number of aircraft in an airfield area,
following different paths, during the approach, alignment, landing and taxiing stages,
as well as during takeoff and go-around. Depending on the configuration, MLS can
be used in conditions of an acceptable minimum of I, II or III categories of ICAO.
The basis of MLS is the angular and distance measuring subsystems independent
of each other. DME/P is used as a ranging subsystem. The angular subsystem is used
to determine the angular positions of the aircraft in the horizontal (azimuthal) and
vertical (elevation) planes using azimuthal and elevation beacons.
The airborne MLS equipment is common to all functions related to determining
the angular coordinates of an aircraft. The separation of functions in the airborne
equipment is achieved by using a temporary seal with alternate operation of ground
radio beacons. The functions of the angular subsystem is to transfer of the azimuth
angle during landing with low- and high-speed repetition functions, azimuth angle
when the aircraft goes to the second circle or during takeoff, elevation angle during
landing, elevation angle during alignment, basic and auxiliary data, and azimuth
angle within 360◦ .
Detailed information on the operation of the system is given in [3]. The following
briefly describes the format of the signals and the features of their processing.
The MLS receiver provides the following information:
(1) azimuth, (2) reverse azimuth, (3) elevation angle 1, (4) elevation angle 2, (5)
deviation from the given azimuth, (6) deviation from the specified elevation angle,
(7) deviation from the specified reverse azimuth, (8) selected angle reduction, (9)
selected approach angle, (10) frequency channel number; (11) basic and auxiliary
data.
The preamble of the signal provides recognition and independent processing of
each function. This or that function may be transmitted by ground equipment or be
absent, in which case it will also be absent in the output information of the receiver.
Tasks solved by MLS receiver:
(1) Receive signals and measure the azimuth and elevation of the aircraft.
(2) Determination of the line of a given path at all stages of landing, takeoff and
relanding approach, including:
(a) prelanding maneuver (curvilinear trajectory in the horizontal plane,
rectilinear in the vertical plane);
(b) landing approach (flight along piecewise linear glide path, straight-line
trajectory in the horizontal plane);
(c) alignment (rectilinear trajectory in the horizontal plane, curved in the
vertical).
(d) Developing linear deviations from a given track line (coordinate trans-
formation task).
(3) Issue of basic and auxiliary data to the crew and to the airborne systems.
(4) Monitoring the status of the MLS receiver.
5.4 MLS Signal Processing 233
The MLS receiver measures each function emitted by the beacon regardless of
the position of this function in the transmitted sequences.
The principle of operation of the MLS receiver is as follows.
Azimuth and elevation radio beacons emit high-frequency scanning signals using
narrow-beam antennas. The determination of the angular position of the aircraft is
based on the measurement by the airborne transceiver of the time interval tψ , tθ
between two pulses I-A and I-B appearing at the receiver output when the aircraft
is irradiated with a narrow beam of the antenna. The angles in the horizontal and
vertical planes are respectively equal to:
= (To − t )M ,
θ = (Toθ − tθ )Mθ
where
To — is the time interval between the pulses I-A and I-B when the aircraft is in a
vertical plane on the runway axis;
Toθ —is the time interval between the pulses I-A and I-B when the aircraft is on a
glide path corresponding to 0°;
M , Mθ —scale multipliers equal to half the scanning speed of the antenna beam.
The countdown in the airborne receiver begins with the moment of receiving the
starting impulse. The starting pulse is transmitted by the omnidirectional antenna of
the beacon during the emission of the preamble, which precedes the beginning of the
beam scanning in the forward direction. The preamble signal is transmitted in the
entire sector corresponding to the coverage area to identify a specific function being
transmitted. The preamble consists of a period of allocation of the radio frequency
carrier during a time of 12 bits, a reference time code (bits 1–5) and a function
identification code (bits 6–10), as well as two parity bits (11–12).
In the interval between the preamble and the radiation time of the scanning beam,
the beacon emits sector signals, which transmit information on the identification
of ground equipment, airborne antenna selection, off-season indication and control
pulses. The level of off-season indication pulses (OIP) outside the guidance zone
is greater than the level of any guidance signal in the off-zone sector, and in the
guidance zone, it is less than the level of the scanning beam or clearance signal level
by at least 5 dB.
All angular information is transmitted at a frequency of one channel. The func-
tions of the main and auxiliary data used airborne the aircraft are transferred at free
intervals.
Angular information, main and auxiliary data are transmitted on any of 200
channels in the range from 5031.0 to 5090.7 MHz with a frequency grid through
300 kHz.
Preamble codes and signals of the main and auxiliary data are transmitted using
differential phase-shift keying (DPSK) of the radio frequency carrier. “Zero” corre-
sponds to a phase shift of 0◦ ± 10◦ , “one”—a phase shift of 180◦ ± 10◦ . The
modulation rate is 15,625 bps (Hz). The cycle time is 64 µs.
The MLS receiver unit consists of a receiver device that ends with the outputs
of the demodulated DPSK signals and the detected AM signals; signal processor,
I/O processor and power supplies. It works with antenna-feeder system consisting
of three antennas.
The receiver is built on a superheterodyne circuit with double frequency conver-
sion on the amplitude channel and triple frequency conversion on the phase channel.
The first intermediate frequency is 372 MHz, and the second is 12 MHz. The signals
of the second intermediate frequency arrive at a bandpass filter having a bandwidth
of 150 kHz. This filter provides selectivity in adjacent channels. Further, the signals
of 12 MHz are amplified in a logarithmic amplifier. From one output of this amplifier,
after detection, the signals go to the video amplifier and then to the signal processor.
From the other output of the logarithmic amplifier, the signals of the second inter-
mediate frequency are fed to the third mixer, where they are converted to the third
intermediate frequency 0.8 MHz. Next, the converted signals arrive at the phase
channel, where demodulation of the DPSK signals occurs. The detected AM signal
and the demodulated DPSK signal enter the DSP.
The algorithms of the DSP and IOP provide (Fig. 5.4):
Fig. 5.4 Block diagram of Shaping of a logarithmic

the MLS signal processing amplitude characteristic
algorithm
Amplitude Demodulation DPSK

detection preamble signal
Standby mode:
antenna switching
Search mode:
evaluation of signal levels;
maximum amplitude selection;
estimation of the pulse amplitude of the off-season
indication;
measurement of amplitudes and time position of scanning
pulses;
evaluation of the duration of the scanning pulses
Tracking mode:
tracking the temporary position of the scanning pulses;
evaluation of the disappearance of the scanning pulses and
the ratios of the amplitudes of the scanning pulses, preamble, OIP
signals, clearance signals;
computing of the angular positions of the aircraft;
information output to external systems
5.4 MLS Signal Processing 235
• real-time angular signal processing;

• calculation of the angular coordinates based on the results of primary processing;
• assessment of the accuracy of angular signals;
• filtering measurement results;
• calculation of deviations from the selected landing trajectory;
• reception and processing of words of main and auxiliary data;
• formation and output of information;
• automatic gain control;
• synthesizer control;
• generation of identification signal.
In DSP, digital signal processing is carried out. A 9-bit ADC with a sampling
frequency of 1 MHz is used to convert the AM signal. The information arriving
on the phase channel is converted from an DPSK into a parallel code. The signal
processing algorithm consists of three modes: signal waiting, search and tracking. In
the signal standby mode, the antennas are switched with a period of 1–1.5 s until the
azimuth function preamble is decoded. After decoding the signal of the preamble, the
DSP switches to the search mode of the desired antenna. In this mode, the following
operations are performed:
• estimated the signal level at each of the three antenna outputs;
• an antenna output having a maximum signal amplitude is selected;
• the amplitude of the pulses of the OIP signal from the output of the selected
antenna is estimated.
When processing the scanning pulses, the codes of the voltage readings of these
pulses are recorded from the ADC via direct access to the RAM. Next, the processor
searches for the maximum of these values (search for the pulse amplitude) and
determines the temporal position of the maximum point for each of the “to and fro”
scanning pulses.
If the amplitudes found are less than the OIP levels or are located asymmetrically
relative to the scanning center, or differ sharply in amplitude, then a decision is taken
to continue the search. If the amplitudes of the scanning signals exceed the OIP
signals, the temporal position of the midpoint of the scanning pulse is calculated:
The voltage values of the signal located later and earlier than the maximum value
and lower by 3 dB are searched. Temporary positions T 0 and T 1 of these values are
found. The temporary position of the midpoint of the scanning pulse is assumed to
be (T 0 + T 1 )/2; the correspondence of the measured duration of the angular signal
at the level of 3 dB of information received from the ground beacon in the main
data word is evaluated. If the values of the measured and received duration of the
angular signal do not coincide, a decision is made about its unreliability and the
search mode continues. If the values for the scanning pulses coincide, strobes are set
which are 128 µs wider than the scanning pulses. These strobes limit the time during
which analog-to-digital conversion and recording of information about the samples
of signals in RAM are performed. This provides protection against interference,
commensurate with the level of the scanning pulse.
Next comes the transition to the tracking mode. In this mode, in the course of
calculations, the following is performed:
• tracking the positions of the scanning pulses and adjusting the strobe time limits;
• evaluation of the disappearance of the scanning pulses and the ratios of the
amplitudes of the scanning pulses, preamble, OIP signals, clearance signals;
• calculation of the angle value from the temporal positions of the scan pulse Tcp1
and Tcp2 :

Ti jm = T0 − Tcp1 − Tcp2 S,
where T0 is the time between scanning pulses corresponding to the position of the
aircraft on the 0° line relative to the ground beacon of a given angular function;
S is the steepness of the change in the temporal position of the scanning pulses
relative to the change in the angular position of the aircraft; calculation of the
angular deviation of the position of the aircraft from a given angle value.
The calculated values are transferred to the input–output processor, which
performs the conversion and output of the necessary information to the consumer.
Control of the receiver from external systems is also carried out through an IOP.
5.5 Formation and Signal Processing RSBN
5.5.1 RSBN-Type Short-Range Radio Navigation System
The Russian short-range radio navigation system RSBN consists of a ground-based

azimuth-distance beacon and an avionics. RSBN is designed to determine airborne
aircraft azimuth and slant range relative to the installation location of the beacon and
display on the beacon the location of the aircraft located in the system’s coverage
area [1, 10].
To determine the slant range in RSBN, the pulse-time request and response method
is used, with the airborne distance measuring device being the request, and the beacon
transponder being the responder.
The definition of azimuth in the system is based on measuring the time interval
between the point in time when the directional azimuth antenna of the beacon, rotating
at a constant speed, is directed to the north, and the point in time when this antenna
is directed to the mobile object. To determine the point of time on board an aircraft,
when the azimuth antenna is directed north, the system uses a series of reference
pulse signals “35” and “36.” The name of the signals “35” and “36” is due to their
number, emitted during one revolution of the azimuth antenna. At the moment when
the azimuth antenna is directed to the north, the next airborne signal “35” received
on board coincides in time with the received next signal “36” and forms the “ North
signal.”
5.5 Formation and Signal Processing RSBN 237
To determine the point in time when the azimuth antenna is directed to a mobile
object, an azimuth signal (AS) is used, received on board the aircraft as a result of its
irradiation with a directional rotating beacon antenna. The shape of the AS repeats
the shape of the directional characteristic of the azimuthal antenna of the beacon in
the horizontal plane. The moment of reception on board the AS is fixed according to
a certain rule.
There are two modifications RSBN:
• the first—with omnidirectional radiation (OR) and reception of ranging signals,
as well as with continuous radiation of the AS;
• the second—with directional radiation (DR) and reception of ranging and
reference signals, as well as pulsed radiation of the AS.
In the second modification, the requested ranging signals are received and the
response ranging signals are emitted by the beacon through a directional antenna,
which rotates with the azimuth antenna. In addition to the signals “35” and “36,”
an additional sequence of signals “1°” is emitted through this antenna. The azimuth
signal is emitted in the form of a sequence of short single pulses “0.25” with a
repetition period of 0.25°, which corresponds to 416.67 µs.
The type of the reference and azimuth diagrams irradiating the airborne equipment
is given in [6]. They are characterized by the width of one petal of the azimuthal
diagram T2 , the width of the “hollow” between the petals T1, the width of the reference
diagram T3 . If 1 < T1 < 14, 2 < T2 < 21, then the radiation and reception of all
signals, except for the impulses “0.25,” is carried out through the reference antenna.
If T2 > 21 at T1 < 14, then all the signals can be emitted and received through one
azimuth antenna.
For the separation of all signals, RSBN, except for the AU, is applied interval-
time coding (ITC). With this coding method, each signal is represented as a group
of pulses. The value of time code intervals between pulses is given in [6, 10].
The frequency range RSBN given in Table 1.1. Work is carried out on 88 or 176
frequency-code channels in interval between frequency channels 0.7 MHz.
5.5.2 RSBN Signals Processing
Processing RSBN signals in one of the types of existing avionics (Fig. 5.5) is
performed in the navigation and landing block, consisting of receiving, transmit-
ting, azimuth and range measuring modules and input–output devices. Signals are
received by an airborne two-channel receiver. One of the channels in the omnidi-
rectional mode serves to receive azimuth and reference signals, the other, range
responses. In the directional mode, each channel receives all beacon signals.
The receiver is a superheterodyne receiver with a single frequency conversion. The
intermediate frequency is equal to 63 MHz. The bandwidth of the “wide” IF amplifier
(IFA) (for ranging, reference signals and pulsed AS) is 1.0 MHz. The selectivity of
the “wide” IFA with detuning at ±2.8 MHz is 40 dB. The bandwidth of the “narrow”
From the filter Δf = 1,0 МHz
OR
DR Filtering
(Δf = 0,4 МГц)
Amplitude Amplitude
detection detection
Preliminary Pulses amplitude

processing АS measurement
Shaping
Measurement of Measurement of
receiver
the amplitude АS the temporal
gain
position of pulses
control
Measurement of
the temporal
position of the AS Amplitude and Shaping receiver
envelope duration selection gain control
Azimuth
Search and
measurement
Signal decoding response range
signals detection
Azimuth
filtering
Search and
detection of
«1°», «35», «36» Range From signal
signals measurement shaper
Tracking of «1°», Range filtering

«35», «36»
signals position
Shaping request
control signals
Calculation of
"North signal"
position
From signal shaper
Fig. 5.5 Block diagram of the signal processing algorithm RSBN
IFA (for continuous-wave AS) is 0.4 MHz. The selectivity of the “narrow” IFA, with
detuning at ±0.7 MHz, is 60 dB.
After filtering and amplification, the IFA signals are detected and fed to the prepro-
cessing device. In this device, the interval-time coding signals are decoded in discrete
decoders. Decoded signals in the form of sequences of one-night pulses, normalized
in amplitude and duration, are sent to the time meters of the device for measuring
the azimuth and distance. Azimuth signal with continuous radiation after detection
5.5 Formation and Signal Processing RSBN 239
enters the latch temporary position. The temporary position code of the AS is then
fed to the azimuth meter.
Pulsed AS after the detector is gated by narrow strobe. Next, the envelope AS is
highlighted and its temporary position is measured.
Algorithms are implemented in the device for measuring azimuth and range:
• search and detection of signals “1°”, “35”, “36”;
• tracking the position of the signals “1°”, “35”, “36”;
• calculate the temporary position of the “North signal”;
• azimuth measurements;
• azimuth filtering;
• signal shaping “Request for range”;
• search and detection of signals “Response range”;
• distance measurements;
• range filtering;
• formation of the receiver’s automatic gain control signal;
• shaping of ground response signal.
The measured values of the azimuth and range are fed to the IOP, which ensures
their issuance to adjacent systems. In the same IOP from the FNC, the control signals
that determine the mode and frequency-code channel of the RSBN are generated.
Details of signal processing in RSBN considered in [10].
5.6 Shaping and Processing of Signals PRMG
The decimeter range landing system (landing group PRMG) consists of ground
course, glide slope beacons, a range retranslator and avionics. The course and glide
beacons of the system are equisignal; the range retranslator has an omnidirectional
antenna. The antenna system of the course (glide slope) beacon forms a radiation
pattern in the form of two intersecting main lobes, the equisignal zone of which
coincides with the course line (glide dy). Switching the power supply circuit of the
antennas is carried out with a nominal frequency of 12.5 Hz. During the formation
of the “right” (“upper”) diagram, a signal is emitted, modulated in amplitude by a
signal of the “meander” type with a frequency of (1300 ± 7) Hz, and during the
formation of the “left” (“lower”) diagram with a frequency (2100 ± 10) Hz.
The range retranslator works with airborne equipment similar to RSBN with
omnidirectional mode of radiation and reception.
The airborne receiver is completely identical to the azimutated channel of the
RSBN receiver. The unit for processing angular signals, part of the RSBN navigation
and landing block, contains two identical pairs of strip filters for the course and glide
channels, the input of which receives signals after detection in the receiving device
(Fig. 5.6). The first filter in each pair allocates the first harmonic of the frequency
1300 Hz from the meander, the second filter—the frequency 2100 Hz. The amplitude-
frequency characteristics of the filters should be identical (with an accuracy of 1%),
Fig. 5.6 Block diagram of Amplitude

the processing of angular detection
signals PRMG (angular
channel)
Digital filtering Digital filtering
(F1 = 2100 Гц) (F2 = 1300 Гц)
Amplitude Amplitude
Computing
of DC
DC tracking
and filtering
Shaping
automating gain
control signals
have flat tops (with unevenness up to 1%) within ±15 Hz; each filter has a bandwidth
of about 150 Hz; parasitic “spillover” of the 1300 Hz frequency signal into the
2100 Hz filter and vice versa—no more than 5%.
After filters, using a peak detector, the envelope of the sinusoidal segment of the
one and the other frequencies is selected, the amplitudes U1 and U2 of the envelope
of the sinusoids of frequencies 1300 Hz, 2100 Hz are measured and the navigation
parameter is calculated—deviation coefficient (DC), equal DC = (U2 − U1)/(U2
+ U1) × 100%. Next, in the processing device, tracking and filtering of navigation
parameters are performed, which are then output to the IOP. The IOP converts the
measured values of the DC of the course channels and the glide paths, as well as the
range, to digital and analog form for issuing an aircraft to adjacent systems.
5.7 Shaping and Processing of Signals in the Modes

“Rendezvous” and MCD
The “Rendezvous” mode is intended to provide for the rendezvous of two aircrafts in
the air for refueling. For its implementation, both aircraft are equipped with identical
equipment. At the same time, the avionics of one of the aircraft must operate in the
“Measurement” submode, and the other in the “Retransmission” submode.
In the “Measurement” submode, the avionics of one of the airplanes measures
the distance to the other aircraft and the deviation from the zero bearing to it (the
5.7 Shaping and Processing of Signals in the Modes … 241
deviation of the interacting aircraft from the signal-equal zone of the antenna of two
antennas, which coincides with the axis of the aircraft). Determination of the distance
is made by the method of “request-response” similar to RSBN. In this case, the
interrogator is the avionics in the submode “Measurement,” the transponder avionics
in submode “Retransmission.” The amplitude of the response signals arriving at the
first (U1 ) and
second (U2 ) antennas is used to calculate the informative parameter—
(U1 − U2 ) (U1 + U2 ), which characterizes the deviation from the zero bearing.
The structure of the signal processing algorithms in the “Rendezvous” mode is
shown in Fig. 5.7.
Fig. 5.7 Block diagram of Аmplitude

the signal processing detection
algorithm in the
“Rendezvous” mode
Pulse amplitude
measurement,
maximum signal
selection
Shaping signal
requests
Antenna
switching
Fixation of the DC
pulses temporal measurement
position
Selection by DC smoothing
duration
Shaping Signal decoding

receiver gain
control
signals Search and
response detection
Range
measurement
Range and
velocity
smoothing
In the mutual coordinate determination (MCD) mode, distance measurements

should be provided between all aircraft in a certain group, information exchange
between them, containing data on aircraft coordinates and measured relative
distances, and calculation on each aircraft based on the obtained information of bear-
ings and corners of the space of interacting aircraft. Distance measurement is carried
out using the “request–response” method, similar to the “Rendezvous” mode. The
principle of temporary separation is used to support the operation of several aircraft
with the avionics.
5.8 Shaping and Processing Signals of the ATC

Transponder
5.8.1 Secondary Surveillance Radar (SSR)
Secondary surveillance radar (SSR) is intended to transmit information on the “air-

to-ground” channel that is necessary for air traffic control and flight safety (airborne
number, flight altitude, etc.) and on the “ground-to-air” channel—information about
recommended maneuvers to exclude specific situations, given echelon level, etc.
Operation modes of SSR:
• mode A—to receive responses from the transponder with the purpose of
identification and surveillance;
• Mode C—for receiving replies from a transponder with the purpose of automati-
cally transmitting data on barometric altitude and surveillance;
• combined mode—a general call in A/C/S modes in order to receive responses
from transponders operating in A/C modes, in order to surveillance and isolate
respondents working in S mode, and a common call-only in A/C to receive replies
from transponders working in A/C mode. Mode S transponders do not respond;
• S mode: common call-only in S mode to allocate transponders operating in S
mode;
• omnidirectional transmission of information to all transponders operating in S
mode. No replies are given;
• selective transmission of information to individual transponders operating in S
mode.
In S mode, there are 25 request formats that go through the “ground-to-air” channel
(“up”) and 25 response formats that go through the “air-to-ground” (“down”) channel.
All transponders operating in S mode correspond to one of five levels [4].
A level 1 transponder features the following capabilities:
• providing identification data in mode A and barometric height in mode C;
• transceivers for intermode request and request for a common call mode S;
5.8 Shaping and Processing Signals of the ATC Transponder 243
• targeted surveillance transceivers with transmission of altitude and identification

data;
• provision of blocking protocols;
• provision of core data protocols, with the exception of data link capability reports;
• transceivers via the “air-to-air” communication and self-generated signals.
• A level 2 transponder has a level 1 transceiver capability and capabilities:
• transmission of standard length messages (Comm-A and Comm-B);
• transmission of data link capabilities;
• aircraft identification data messages.
The transponder level 3 has the capabilities of a transceiver level 2 and the ability
to transmit extended messages (ELM) over the “ground-to-air” communication
channel.
A level 4 transponder has a level 3 transceiver capability and capabilities to
transmit ELM messages over an “air-to-ground” communications link.
A level 5 transponder has a level 4 transceiver capability and capabilities for
advanced Comm-B and ELM transmission.
Systems with capabilities of operation in mode A and mode C operate on the
following frequencies:
• carrier frequency of request signals:
(1030.0 ± 0.2) MHz—international band,
(837.5 ± 0.3) MHz—Russian range;
• carrier frequency response signals:
(1090 ± 3) MHz—international band;
(740 ± 1.8) MHz—Russian range.
Timing diagrams of pulse arrangement in the modes of request and response are
given in [4].
Systems with mode S capabilities operate at the following frequencies:
• the carrier frequency of the request signal (transmission “up”) of the international
range is (1030 ± 0.01) MHz, the Russian range is (837.5 ± 0.3) MHz.
Mode S requests are pulse modulated. In addition, the pulse P6 has an internal
phase-shift keying, i.e., 180° phase change at 4 Mbps.
The carrier frequency of the response signals (transmission “down”) of transpon-
ders with mode S is:
• in the international range—(1090 ± 1) MHz;
• in the Russian range—(740 ± 1.8) MHz.
The response in mode S consists of a preamble and a data block. The preamble
consists of four pulses; the data block is a sequence with binary phase-pulse
modulation with a data frequency of 1 Mbps.
All response pulses start at a specific interval, a multiple of 0.5 µs from the first
transmitted pulse. The tolerance for the position of pulses is ±0.05 µs. The duration
of all preamble pulses is 0.5 µs.
The request data block consists of a sequence of 56 or 112 bits of data located
after the overturning of the data phase within the limits of pulse P6. A change in the
phase of the carrier by 180◦ , preceding the discharge of the data, indicates that this
digit corresponds to the binary “1”. The absence of phase reversal is considered a
binary “0”.
The response data block consists of 56 or 112 data bits, which are generated
using binary phase-pulse modulation. The impulse transmitted in the first half of the
interval is a binary “1”, and in the second half—a double “0".
Data formats and transmission protocols are described in detail in [4].
5.8.2 SSR Data and Signal Processing
As an example, consider the processing of signals and data of SSR in one of the types
of existing equipment. The airborne transponder contains three blocks:
• block of Russian modes (BRM), consisting of a receiver (837.5 MHz), a
transmitter (740 MHz), a coding–decoding device of Russian codes (CDD-RC);
• block of international modes (BIM), consisting of a receiver (1030 MHz), a trans-
mitter (1090 MHz), a coding–decoding device that provides coding and decoding
in the address mode and with non-selective SSR (CDD-IC);
• processor block.
The defendant has extensive connections with various airborne systems: FMS,
EDS, ADS, fuel-measuring system, RTS control panel, system for collecting and
localizing failures, airborne collision avoidance system, state identification system.
In ATC modes with an SSR international standard, the respondent works as
follows. Request signals are sent to the upper and lower antennas of 1030/1090 MHz.
From the outputs of the antennas, the signals arrive at the two-channel receiving
device BIM, where suppression of the requests received during the irradiation of
the airborne antenna by the side lobes of the antenna beam of the SSR antenna is
performed. In the channels of the BIM receiver, the local oscillator and the video
output signals are common. Pulse signals from two receivers are fed to two rectifiers
operating in the opposite polarity. The rectified voltages are added to the total load,
and the sign of the resulting voltage controls the state of the output stage, which indi-
cates from which antenna the larger signal is received. Video signals before adding
to the amplitude selection circuit are added according to the “OR” scheme; i.e., the
amplitude selection scheme receives a larger signal.
Phase manipulation is detected in the receiver, and IF radio pulses are generated,
which are then fed to an amplitude detector, a video amplifier and an output driver.
The normalized signals from the output of the receiver of the BIM arrive at the
CDD-RC, where the decoding of the requests is performed:
• airborne search (code 9.4 µs);
• current information (code 14 µs);
5.8 Shaping and Processing Signals of the ATC Transponder 245
• travel speed vector information (23 µs code);

and coding the corresponding response informational links. From the output of the
CDD-RC informational pulse packets arrive at the transmitter.
After decoding the request code, the CDD-RC generates signals intended for
blanking the CDD-IC and other airborne systems at the time of issuing the response
parcel.
During the operation of the transponder in ATC modes with SSR of the Russian
standard, requests are sent through receiving devices BRM. The rest of the work is
done as in the previous case.
The work of the transponder in the address mode is as follows. Requests at the
carrier frequency of 1030 MHz are received at the BIM receiver, where the side
lobes are suppressed, the signals from the upper and lower antennas are compared,
the signal is demodulated with relative phase-shift keying. The normalized pulses
of modulated and phase-manipulated signals arrive at CDD-IC, where decoding of
intermode request codes (8 + 2) µs and (21 + 2) µs and address inquiry packets and
encoding of response address packets is performed. From the output of the CDD-IC,
the response address packets in the form of pulses of a sequential 60-bit or 116-bit
code arrive at the transmitter BIM and at a frequency of 1090 MHz are transmitted
to the SSR.
CDD-IC is constantly in the mode of receiving pulse-modulated signals and
detecting the base, i.e., two pulses with a time interval of 2 µs, 8 µs or 21 µs.
In the case of simultaneous detection of two or three bases, the CDD-IC makes a
priority selection of the base, while the base 2 µs has the highest priority and the base
8 µs—the lowest. After detecting a 2 µs base, the CDD-IC checks for the presence
of a synchronous phase reversal pulse, and if it is detected, it receives phase-shifted
signals from the receiver;
After receiving the phase-shift keyed requests, the CDD-IC analyzes the bits of
the address of the request information and compares the received address with the
address of the given airborne number. In a validation check, the CDD-IC generates
a response information packet.
Upon detection of a base of 8 µs or 21 µs, the CDD-IC after 2 µs checks for the
presence of a pulse with a duration of 1.6 µs. In its absence, the CDD-IC responds
with an identification code (for a base of 8 µs) or a height code (for a base of 21 µs).
In the presence of 1.6 µs pulse, the CDD-IC issues a format 11 response (mode S).
Reception, information processing and the shaping of response information should be
carried out in 128 µs. CDD-IC provides processing of at least 50 requests, randomly
alternating for 1 s and has the ability to form 16 responses during an arbitrary time
interval of 1 s duration.
5.9 VDB Signal Processing
The main technical characteristics and procedures for the operation of avionics in
VDB mode are defined in [3]. To work in this mode, the avionics should provide
tuning to any of the frequencies in the range 108.0–117.975 MHz in 25 kHz
increments.
GBAS messages are transmitted over VDB using a time division multiple access
(TDMA) system. TDMA protocol is based on frames and time intervals. The duration
of each frame is 500 ms. The frames are synchronized with Coordinated Universal
Time (UTC). Each one-second epoch of UTC contains two such frames. The first
of these frames begins at the beginning of the UTC epoch, and the second begins
500 ms after the start of the UTC epoch.
The frame consists of eight equal time intervals, each of which is equal to 62.5 ms.
At each selected time interval, no more than one data packet is transmitted. Each
packet contains at least one message and can have a variable length. The beginning of
the packet is delayed relative to the beginning of the time interval by 95.2 ± 95.2 µs.
The maximum duration of a packet is equal to 61,047.6 µs, which ensures, given
the maximum delay in the start of a packet, its termination at least 1262 µs before
the end of the selected time interval. The protective time interval equal to 1262 µs
provides the VDB signal propagation distance of about 378 km (more than 200 mi)
in one direction.
A data packet contains several elements (time intervals of a certain duration):
• increase in transmitter power;
• transmitter power stabilization;
• synchronization and ambiguity resolution;
• data transfer;
• decrease in transmitter power.
During the rise, stabilization and decrease in transmitter power, data zeros are
transmitted. The transmitter power stabilization interval can be used by the airborne
DATALINK receiver for automatic gain control.
LKKS messages are formed as a sequence of characters, each of which consists
of three consecutive message bits. Symbols are converted into a modulated signal
using differential (relative) phase-shift keying by shifting the phase of the carrier
frequency by 45° (D8PSK). After modulation, the signal passes through a pulse
envelope shaping filter, which reduces intersymbol interference.
The duration of one bit to be transmitted over the radio channel is 31.746 µs.
Thus, the speed of transmission of information bits is 31,500 bps; the transmission
rate of characters is 10,500 characters/s.
The shaping of GBAS data transmitted on board the aircraft is performed in the
following sequence:
• formatting message data;
• shaping of forward error correction (FEC) of the tuning sequence;
• shaping of FEC message data;
5.9 VDB Signal Processing 247
• data conversion (scrambling);

• modulation.
Transmitted data consists of a demodulator setup sequence followed by message
data and message data FEC. The message data FEC is computed from the message
using the Reed–Solomon code.
With all the data, located after the sequence used for synchronization and reso-
lution of non-unique values, scrambling is carried out by adding this data modulo 2
with a pseudo-random sequence.
The airborne VDB message processor implements analog-to-digital conversion
of receiver signals, demodulation of signals, detection of the beginning of a packet,
determination of the beginning of a message block, descrambling and decoding of
message data, shaping of words for issuing via an ARINC 429 interface.
The content of the messages issued by the processor to the users corresponds to
the ICAO standard. The messages contain corrections to pseudo-ranges measured
airborne the aircraft, information about the GBAS, information on the final approach
phase and on the predicted operational readiness of range sources.
References
1. Sosnovskij AA, Hajmovich IA, Lutin EA, Maksimov IB (1990) Aviacionnaya radionavigaciya:
Spravochnik (Pod red., Sosnovskogo AA). – M.: Transport
grazhd. aviacii. – M.: Transport.
Prilozhenie 10 k Konvencii o mezhdunarodnoj grazhdan-skoj aviacii. – T.I.Radionavigacionnye
sredstva. – Izd.5-e. – IKAO, 1996
Prilozhenie 10 k Konvencii o mezhdunarodnoj grazhdan-skoj aviacii. – T.IV.Sistemy obzornoj
radiolokacii i preduprezhde-niya stolknovenij. – Izd.2-e. – IKAO, 1998
Prilozhenie 10 k Konvencii o mezhdunarodnoj grazhdan-skoj aviacii. – T.III, ch.I.Sistemy
peredachi cifrovyh dannyh. – Izd.1-e.– IKAO, 1995 (s uchetom popravki 76 ot 01.11.01g.)
6. Normy letnoj godnosti grazhdanskih samoletov (NLGS-3). Prilozhenie P8.3.D. – 1992
7. Solov’ev YUA (2000) Sistemy sputnikovoj navigacii. – M.: Eko-Trendz
8. Setevye sputnikovye radionavigacionnye sistemy /V.S.SHebshaevich, P.P.Dmitriev,
N.V.Ivancevich i dr.; Pod red. P.P.Dmitrieva i V.S.SHebshaevicha. – M.: Radio i svyaz’,
1982
9. Lipkin IA (2001) Sputnikovye navigacionnye sistemy. – M.: Vuz. kn. – 288s
10. Obrabotka signalov v radiotekhnicheskih sistemah blizhnej navigacii /G.A.Paholkov,
G.E.Zbrickaya, YU.T.Krivoruchko, B.V.Ponomarenko, YU.G.SHatrakov. – M.: Radio i svyaz’,
1992. – 256s
Chapter 6
Joint Processing of Information
in Integrated Airborne Radio Electronic
Equipment
6.1 Modern Theoretical Approaches to Information

Processing in the Airborne Flight-Navigation Complex
In the first decades of aviation, airborne aviation equipment consisted of several

electromechanical sensors and actuators, which, on the one hand, closed on the
external environment, and on the other hand, on the pilot and through him on the
aircraft. The flows of information passing through them were insignificant and were
processed by the pilot interactively.
Modern information processing in airborne avionics is a complex multilayered
hierarchical automated system of decision-making, in which the overall mission
control problem and target tasks are divided into a family of successively simpler
decision-making tasks. Hierarchy arises naturally in connection with the following
main aspects of the decision-making process under uncertainty [1]:
• selection of a strategy to be used in the decision-making process;
• reducing or eliminating uncertainty;
• search for a preferred or acceptable course of action that satisfies the specified
constraints.
The functional hierarchy corresponding to these aspects (Fig. 6.1) consists of three
layers. In the layer of choice of the method of action, the decision-making element
obtains an estimate G of information I and, using one or another algorithm, finds the
method of action m. If the quality of the evaluation of input information I, containing
the uncertainty of U, is described by the characteristics of the system V, then the task
of optimizing m with respect to V with given sets I and U can be posed and lot of
uncertainties of U. This is done at the elements of the information processing and
adaptation layer.
The set U is considered as a set that includes all the supposed ignorance about
the behavior of the system and reflects all the hypotheses about the possible sources
and types of uncertainties. Elements U are formed by observing external sources of
information and the states of the system itself. The purpose of the second layer is
250 6 Joint Processing of Information in Integrated Airborne …
Fig. 6.1 Multilayer

decision-making system
to narrow the set of U-indeterminations and thereby simplify the operation of the
selection layer. In stationary states of the environment and the system, the learning
layer can use constantly selected sources of information. However, if necessary, it
can completely change the composition of these sources if the existing set of sources
does not achieve the global goal of the system. Such a change in the strategy to reduce
uncertainty is a function of the self-organization layer.
The self-organization layer must choose the structure, functions and strategies
used on the underlying layers in such a way as to bring the global goal closer in real
time.
In a multilayer decision-making scheme, the information processing and adapta-
tion layer provide for receiving information from the external environment, reducing
uncertainty and preparing data for the selection and decision-making layer. The
choice of the approach to decision-making under uncertainty conditions and the
corresponding mathematical methods largely depends on the type of uncertainty
describing the decision problem.
According to one of the existing classifications [2], the types of uncertainty can
be represented as a tree (Fig. 6.2). Non-fame is characterized by a practical lack of
information about the task and encourages its further collection. In the process of
collecting information, various types of its unreliability can appear as follows:
• not all possible information has been collected (incomplete);
• the information gathered is not enough to make a decision (failure);
• for some elements, not their exact descriptions, but the sets to which these
descriptions belong (undetermined) are defined;
• a number of elements are described by analogy with the problems already solved,
but it may turn out that the information about them does not fully correspond to
the problem being solved (inadequacy).
Inadequacy can be further divided into partial consistency and inconsistency.
In all cases of unreliability, the collection of information in principle can be
continued. At the same time, a stop in the collection of information can lead to
6.1 Modern Theoretical Approaches to Information Processing … 251
Fig. 6.2 Classification of types of uncertainty
different outcomes in decision-making. If incompleteness, insufficiency, lack of

determination and partial consistency can worsen the quality of the decision, then
the inconsistency of the information used usually leads to the wrong decision.
In all cases of inaccuracy, except, perhaps, for contradiction, the decision-maker
relates the available information to a scale and determines the degree of his confidence
in this information.
In case of unreliability of information, as a rule, it is possible to further study
the decision-making task, which can lead either to a situation of certainty, when all
elements are described unambiguously, or to a situation of ambiguity. In the latter
case, it is assumed that all the information about the task has been collected before its
solution, but a fully defined description has not been received and cannot be obtained.
The second level of the uncertainty tree (Fig. 6.2) describes the sources of possible
ambiguity of the description, which is the environment in which the decision is
made (physical uncertainty) and used by the decision-maker, professional language
(linguistic uncertainty). Physical uncertainty can be associated both with the pres-
ence in the external environment of several possibilities, each of which randomly
becomes a reality (a situation of chance or stochastic uncertainty) and the inaccu-
racy of measurements of a completely defined value performed by physical devices
(situation of inaccuracy).
The situation of chance generates a large group of decision-making methods
that imply a probabilistic interpretation of events. The axiomatics of the theory of
probability according to Kolmogorov, which served as the basis for the methods of
mathematical statistics [3], became widespread.
Certain dissatisfaction with the possibilities of the classical methods of mathe-
matical statistics in solving problems in a situation of uncertainty led to the creation
of methods united by the term “interval statistical models” [4]. These include
• theory of subjective probabilities [5];

• moment approach [3];
• interval probability distributions;
• interval analysis [6, 7];
• the theory of possibilities and the theory of fuzzy sets [8–10];
• The theory of trust (theory of evidence) of Dempster–Schaefer [11].
The generalization of these methods, except for the latter, is the method of “interval
models defined by primary means” [4].
Linguistic uncertainty is divided into syntactic, semantic and pragmatic uncer-
tainty. This uncertainty of the human natural language is determined by the “necessity
to operate with a finite number of words and a limited number of phrases structures
to describe in a finite time an infinite variety of situations arising in the decision-
making process” [2]. At all three levels of linguistic uncertainty and the structures
of the language carry incomprehensible information that ensures human activity.
In decision-making tasks, information fuzziness is expressed by the presence of
concepts and relations with fuzzy boundaries, as well as statements with a multi-
valued truth scale. The fuzzy sets theory, on the basis of which fuzzy arithmetic,
analysis, logic, etc., became the means of formalizing fuzzy concepts and relations
[9].
The theory of fuzzy sets, proposed in 1965 by L.Zade and interval analysis
(interval mathematics), the basics of which he developed in 1962–66. R. Moore
formally can be attributed to theories based on interval models, although they come
from the analysis of natural language. This allows us to speak about the deep connec-
tion of physical and linguistic uncertainty, which manifest themselves only in human
activity and the technical systems created by it. Often, the uncertainty of a medium for
a decision-maker can manifest itself in the form of both physical and linguistic uncer-
tainty, for example, in game problem statements. Linguistic uncertainties of proba-
bilistic descriptions can both complicate the task with the probabilistic approach and
facilitate its solution (to expand the initial conditions) with a fuzzy approach.
The methods of fuzzy sets found the greatest application in the theory and practice
of management [12]. As one of the prerequisites for the emergence of the idea of a
fuzzy set, L. Zadeh put forward the so-called incompatibility principle, which consists
in the fact that with an increase in the size and complexity of the system, and its
modeling with known mathematical expressions becomes much more complicated.
As a result, the creation of a fully adequate model becomes impossible, and the
control rules based on the usual mathematical model can contradict each other. With
fuzzy control, a large number of rules are processed in parallel. In practice, it comes
down to fuzzy conclusions in fuzzy logic. Unlike classical management methods,
there is no need for a generalized objective function and its optimization. You can
successfully cope with a variety of goals and even with mutually opposing goals.
The results of individual fuzzy conclusions are summarized, and the result
obtained is converted into a numerical value for input into equipment that is subject
to management. A fuzzy control method is also possible with the choice of only one
most suitable rule. This scheme can be characterized as a merger (integration) of

fuzzy knowledge for management purposes.
Practical applications of the theory of fuzzy sets in airborne avionics include,
for example, aircraft automatic control systems [13], airborne operational advising
expert systems [14, 15], technical diagnostics systems [16], fuzzy image recognition
[17], detection of blurred image borders [18], feature extraction from data [19],
recognition of moving objects [20], etc.
The functional hierarchy depicted in Fig. 6.1 is conceptual and gives only a general
idea of the choice of functions of different layers. In practice, the function of any
layer is chosen in such a way that it can be realized with the help of the subsequent
decomposition.
In the following, we will restrict ourselves to the part of the avionics that is included
in the general control loop of the aircraft (Fig. 6.3), containing the controlled object,
sensors, actuators and the governing body (controller). As shown in Chap. 1, this
avionics constitutes a significant part of the airborne equipment of modern aircraft.
Outside it remains the general aircraft equipment and the so-called target equip-
ment of military aircraft intended for defense and control of weapons, although this
equipment is now often regarded as integrated with the aircraft control circuit [21].
As shown in Fig. 6.3, airborne equipment is flight-navigation complex (FNC).
According to the functions performed during the flight, the FNC is usually divided
into flight and navigation complexes. The navigation complex contains airborne
equipment that determines the specified reference trajectory of the flight center of
the aircraft and gives information about the current position of the center of mass
in space, other navigation parameters (speed, acceleration, course angles, pitch, roll,
etc.) and the deviation of the center of mass of aircraft from the reference path. The
flight complex contains equipment that stabilizes the center of mass of the aircraft
Fig. 6.3 Aircraft control loop with FNC equipment

on a given reference trajectory and controls the rotation of the aircraft around the
center of mass, ensuring the required flight characteristics [22].
The possibility of a relative separation of the functions of NC and FC is based on
the principle of separation (see Sect. 6.2).
In accordance with the difference in functions, the main role in information
processing is played by the navigation complex, which includes navigation sensors
and a number of controller functions. The flight system, which can be based on the
crew and the automatic control system (ACS) with executive devices, controls the
navigation complex, produces the aircraft control signals and directly changes the
position of the control elements (ailerons, elevators and positions, etc.).
Modern flight and navigation systems are intellectual control systems, the main
feature of which is adaptation and training, which give knowledge of the unknown
characteristics of the control object and the environment. The overall conceptual
hierarchy of decision-making (Fig. 6.1) is specified in the three-level hierarchical
control system of the aircraft [23]. The upper level of this system performs the
selection of targets and management planning during the flight process of the aircraft.
The algorithms used here belong to the class of semiotic systems, which allow, based
on observation of the external environment and the internal states of the aircraft, to
make decisions about maintaining or changing the control strategy.
The middle management level makes the choice of the way to achieve the set goal
(situational management). Algorithms of control related to this level correspond to
the model class and describe typical flight situations. Currently, airborne operational
advising expert systems (OAES) [14] are being developed for solving problems of
this level. After recognizing the current situation and attributing it to one of the
classes of typical situations, a specific control algorithm is selected using the rule
system stored in the OAES. In military aviation, such a system is intended for the
constant updating of information important for a pilot and providing it with only the
information that a pilot needs to perform a combat task.
For example, one of the OAES variants [15], developed for an F/A-22 aircraft,
consists of five interacting expert subsystems as follows:
• subsystems for assessing the state of airborne systems, in particular engines, and
adjusting actions in the event of a failure of the system;
• combat analysis subsystems based on a database and information from sensors;
• combat task planning subsystems;
• subsystems for planning tactics of combat operations, assessing the nature of the
threat and the objectives for deciding to attack or evade it;
• subsystems of interaction of the pilot with the aircraft, which tracks the priority
tasks of the pilot.
The lower level of control implements the chosen method of achieving the goal.
At this level, the algorithms of program control, feedback control, adaptive and
identification control are used.
Algorithms used in FCs use different methods of control theory. The most widely
used in control theory is an analytical approach that uses the mathematical appa-
ratus of the theory of algebraic, differential and integral equations. This approach
allows to describe the flight dynamics. In the framework of the analytical approach
in the design of ACS, research methods based on the representation of mathematical
models of the controlled system in the form of difference equations have also been
developed. By analogy with the methods of studying continuous systems, here we use
operational methods for solving difference equations, frequency methods and state
space methods [3]. Accounting for nonlinear factors is carried out by the method of
harmonic linearization or by the method of phase space. Considerable attention is
paid to sustainability management.
In complex cases, when it is necessary to take into account a large number
of factors that qualify as random, a probabilistic (stochastic) approach is used in
combination with an analytical one.
The main task in which these approaches are used is the optimization problem—
the determination of optimal controls in the presence of interference with given
information about the control object in the form of mathematical models—equations
that characterize its state and evolution, taking into account the measurements of
phase coordinates.
The solution of the problem of determining the control structure in general form is
achieved by using variational methods. These include direct variational methods, the
Liapunov function method, the maximum principle and dynamic programming. After
their creation, internal connections were established between them. A major step
in the development of modern optimization methods was the Pontryagin maximum
principle, formulated as a unified theorem for solving variational problems for closed
domains with a control constraint [4]. Considerable progress in solving the problems
of control synthesis was achieved due to the development of the method of the optimal
Liapunov function based on the connection with the Bellman principle of optimality
and the method of dynamic programming. The combination of these methods was
the basis of the theory of analytical design of regulators [5–7].
Later, these methods were extended to stochastic control systems [8, 9] and
systems with a random (variable) structure [10, 11].
It is known that the process of controlling a dynamic object can be conducted in two
ways. The control action can be formed either in the form of a program calculated in
advance, based on a priori information about the system, or in the form of a positional
strategy corresponding to the control process based on the feedback principle. In the
latter case, the control action is formed a posteriori, based on additional information
about the system, which becomes known during the management process.
The classical variants of software control tasks assume the existence of a rigorous
mathematical model of the system and complete a priori information about the source
data. The theory of stochastic control uses a probabilistic description of input actions
and system parameters. The term “stochastic control” is usually referred to as a
dynamic object control algorithm chosen (synthesized) taking into account random
factors disturbing the movement of an object and random sensor errors, which in
the case of a positional strategy supply the feedback control loop with statistical
information about the current phase coordinates of the object [24].
The dynamic object and information sensors can be such that the measurement of
the phase coordinates required for stochastic control with feedback occurs with an
accuracy that makes it possible to ignore measurement errors during the synthesis
of the control algorithm. In this case, one speaks of stochastic control by complete
information on phase coordinates. If the values associated with the phase coordinates
are measured with noticeable errors, then we are talking about stochastic control
based on incomplete information about the phase coordinates.
The theory of dual control was created for problems of control by incomplete
information [24, 25]. An essential feature of a dual control system is the fact that
the control action developed by such a system is intended both to bring the object
to the required state and to monitor it. The optimal system with dual control can be
represented in two parts. The first part is the control algorithm itself, and the second
is the algorithm for estimating the parameters included in the control algorithm.
Parameter estimation is carried out on the basis of information about the object’s
input and output variables. Optimal controls are chosen from the condition of the
best estimate. Thus, in the system of stochastic control, the principle of separation
[24] operates: The general algorithm of optimal stochastic control is divided into the
algorithm for processing incoming information and the decision-making algorithm.
The mathematical formulation of the separation principle is given below in Sect. 6.2.
Methods for estimating the states of an object from observation data (measure-
ments) are the subject of observation theory [26]. The probabilistic approach to
estimating the states of a system from accessible measurements of quantities led to
a theory of stochastic observation using the methods of mathematical statistics.
The algorithms of stochastic control are selected on the basis of information about
the control goal, the model of the controlled object and the models of the object’s
input and output processes. There are several levels of a priori information about the
object as follows:
The object model is accurately known.
The object model is set up to a set of parameters (parametric uncertainty regarding
the object model).
The parametric model of the object is not specified, and only some of its properties
are known (nonparametric uncertainty regarding the object model).
Similarly, in the theory of stochastic control, there are

parametric uncertainty (probabilistic properties of process models are known up
to parameters of probability distributions);
nonparametric uncertainty (the probability distribution of processes is unknown);
uncertainty of the mixed type (the parameters of the signal probability and
interference distributions and the form of the noise probability distribution are
unknown).
Combinations of the levels of a priori uncertainty ai and bi give rise to management
and observation methods that differ in the degree of a priori uncertainty.
Currently, there are several basic probabilistic approaches to overcoming
(reducing) a priori uncertainty in management and observation as follows:
Fig. 6.4 Data processing system model
• classical methods of mathematical statistics (the method of moments, the method

of least squares, the maximum likelihood method, the Bayesian approach, the
statistical minimax method, the methods of testing statistical hypotheses, etc.);
• nonparametric and robust methods;
• the principle of adaptation;
• data fusion.
Let us further consider these approaches in relation to data processing, which
provides observation in the navigation complex when operating the aircraft.
Data processing in NC can be represented as the following general model
(Fig. 6.4).
The lower level of data processing includes the tasks of signal processing (signal
processing), state estimation (state estimation) and object identification (object iden-
tification). The top level of processing includes the situation assessment process (situ-
ation assessment), which is combined in military applications with threat assessment
(threat assessment).
Signal processing is based on classical methods of mathematical statistics,
nonparametric and robust methods. Sources of primary information for NC are
sensors that receive signals of different physical nature. The process at the input of
the sensor along with the useful signals always contains interference, introducing
uncertainty in the received useful information. The task is to select signal processing
methods that would minimize the loss of this information.
Signal processing algorithms include procedures for demodulation, decoding,
searching, detecting, discriminating (or resolving) and estimating signal parame-
ters. A priori information is one of the main factors determining the efficiency of
signal processing. “The main line of development of statistical synthesis of decision-

making algorithms at the current stage is to overcome a priori uncertainty in order
to obtain algorithms and their characteristics that are resistant to possible changes in
the probabilistic model of the observed process” [27].
For each type of prior uncertainty, there are different methods for constructing
efficient algorithms. We describe further the main modern approaches, relying, in
particular, on the works [28, 29].
In the classical theory, the statistical characteristics of the signals and interfer-
ences are assumed to be completely a priori definite. The algorithms obtained within
the framework of this theory have the maximum possible (potential) efficiency, when
the actual characteristics of signals and interferences coincide with the characteris-
tics adopted during their synthesis. However, often even a slight deviation of the
actual characteristics from those adopted during the synthesis leads to a significant
decrease in the quality indicators of classical algorithms and sometimes makes their
implementation impossible. Practical application has been found only by those clas-
sical algorithms, in which the quality indicators proved to be resistant to changes
in the characteristics of signals and interference. However, this stability was not
purposefully obtained at the stage of the synthesis of the algorithm. Later, these
algorithms were obtained by methods that take into account the a priori uncertainty
of the signal-interfering environment.
One of the first and most common classical methods is the Bayesian approach
to the synthesis of signal processing algorithms under parametric a priori non-
definiteness. In the Bayesian method of synthesis, uncertain parameters are consid-
ered random with a given a priori probability distribution. Let, for example, the values
of the non-energy parameters of the signal and the interference μ be non-defined,
and let them be distributed with an a priori combined probability density w(, μ). It
is also assumed that the conditional distribution functions of the original sample are
known, up to parameters. As a criterion of optimality in solving problems of detec-
tion, discrimination (resolution) and estimation of signal parameters, the minimum
risk criterion is used, assuming a known loss function.
In the absence of a priori information, both the magnitude of the losses and the
probabilities of the presence or absence of a signal in the initial sample often use
the maximum likelihood criterion (ML), which, in the case of detection or distin-
guishing (resolving) of signals, is equivalent to the minimum risk criterion, if the
losses, associated with making the right decisions, are taken equal to zero, and the
losses associated with making wrong decisions, and the a priori probabilities of all
hypotheses are assumed to be identical. However, even in this case, it is necessary
to have an exact knowledge of the conditional probability distribution functions of
the initial sample.
In problems of estimating parameters of signals in the presence of interfering
parameters μ, the ML criterion assumes that the conditional probability distribu-
tion of a sample with a signal is known with accuracy up to parameters. In this
case, the structure of the detection, discrimination (resolution) and estimation algo-
rithms depends on the interfering parameters, that is, these algorithms are not struc-
turally stable. In addition, the performance of the algorithms largely depends on the
actual values of the interfering parameters. Therefore, in practice, for the problem of
detecting and distinguishing signals, the maximum likelihood criterion is not used.
In the problem of estimating the parameters of the signals, the ML method turned
out to be more efficient: The unknown interfering parameters μ are included in the
estimated parameters, and the estimates of the parameters and μ are determined
[30].
The study of the general structure of solutions under conditions of a priori uncer-
tainty using the minimum risk criterion R(U(x), ) was carried out in [31]. At the
same time, a priori uncertainty is considered as the dependence of the average risk R
on the state parameters and is characterized by the fact that the likelihood function
P(x/) and the a priori distribution P() of these parameters are uncertain. The
distribution functions or their densities can be known up to parameters (parametric
uncertainty), the classes to which these functions belong (nonparametric uncertainty)
can also be specified. In hypothesis testing problems, the parameters are treated as
the number of the i hypothesis H i and the parameters μ as interfering parameters in
each of the hypotheses. Decision U 0 (x), optimal for an uncertain parameter , can
be done in several ways. If minU R for all admissible P(x/) and P() is achieved
with the same solution U 0 (x), then is the uniformly best rule, which is absolutely
optimal. It can be determined using a conventional Bayes procedure.

In the adaptive Bayesian approach, the a posteriori risk R U (x), μ̂ is minimized
by, where μ̂ is the minimax estimate of the parameter μ, which leads to the uniformly
best approximation of the average risk of the decision rule U 0 (x, μ̂) to the minimum
Bayes risk Rmin solutions U 0 (x, μ) with a known parameter μ. Thus, in this case,
the maximal deviation of the average risk R from Rmin is minimized. With an arbi-
trary symmetric difference loss function, the minimax estimates coincide with the
maximum likelihood estimates [31].
In addition to the above, an adaptive Bayesian decision rule has other properties
that allow one to speak of its optimality under parametric a priori uncertainty:
1. If the uniformly best solution rule exists, then the adaptive Bayesian rule
coincides with it.
2. The adaptive Bayesian rule asymptotically (when the signal-to-noise ratio tends
to infinity) coincides with the usual Bayesian rule (with known).
With the help of the adaptive Bayesian approach, a number of problems of the
synthesis of signal processing algorithms in radio navigation avionics were solved
[32].
For signal detection problems, one of the most common optimality criteria applied
under conditions of a priori uncertainty is the Neumann–Pearson criterion. According
to this criterion, out of all possible detection algorithms, choose the one that ensures
the maximum probability of correct detection of the signal β(, μ) under the condi-
tion that the false alarm probability α(, μ) does not exceed the predetermined value
α. In the case of parametric a priori uncertainty, they try to choose a rule that, for a
given α, would provide a maximum of β(, μ) for any values of and μ. Such algo-
rithms are called uniformly most powerful (UMP), but they exist only for a limited
class of probability distributions of the original samples and are rarely encountered
in applied problems.
To obtain an acceptable solution, you can impose additional restrictions, consid-
ering only those detection algorithms that have α(, μ) ≤ β(, μ). Such algorithms
are called unbiased. In this narrower class, it is often possible to find the optimal
algorithm.
In the case of the similarity principle, the set of all possible algorithms is narrowed
down to a class of algorithms with a constant false alarm probability α(μ), where μ
∈ M, M is the so-called many similarity. To apply the similarity principle, there is a
need to have statistics sufficient for the parameter μ (statistics is sufficient for some
parameter if the conditional distribution of the observed sample for any fixed value
of this statistic does not depend on this parameter).
In radio engineering problems, the principles of similarity and non-interlacing are
effective in detecting deterministic signals with an arbitrary energy parameter against
the background of interference with parametric a priori uncertainty. The method of
synthesis of unbiased and similar algorithms was considered in [33].
When it is impossible to build UMP algorithms based on the principles of simi-
larity and unbiasedness, the principle of invariance is often useful. This principle,
described in detail in [28, 33, 34], is very effective in solving problems of optimizing
the algorithms for detecting, discriminating and estimating signal parameters. In
[33], invariant UMP algorithms for many signal detection problems were obtained
and investigated, and their high efficiency was shown under conditions of parametric
a priori uncertainty.
Another classical method for solving the problems of detecting and distinguishing
signals in a parametric prior uncertainty is the statistical minimax approach. With
this approach, for example, an algorithm is found with a limited highest for many
parameters of interference, a false alarm probability level whose maximum proba-
bility of a 1 − β skip has a minimum value for many of the parameters of a mixture of
a signal and interference on a set of uncertainties. An algorithm is called uniformly
minimax if the minimax property is preserved at any energy parameter of the signal.
Minimax algorithms have the form of Bayesian algorithms with the least favorable
prior distribution of signal parameters [34]. Therefore, the synthesis of the minimax
algorithm is reduced to finding such a distribution. To overcome the difficulties
arising from this, the principle of similarity or invariance often attracts. Minimax
algorithms for detecting signals against interference with uncertain parameters are
considered in [33].
With nonparametric a priori uncertainty, neither the form of the probability distri-
bution function of the observed data, nor the prior probability density distributions
are known. In this case, when synthesizing algorithms, it is required to transform the
initial sample into some nonparametric statistics, which does not depend widely on
the distribution of probabilities of interference. This ensures the stabilization of the
probability of a false alarm in a changing noise environment.
It is possible to synthesize optimal nonparametric detection algorithms due to

mathematical difficulties only in the asymptotic case, when the number of indepen-
dent observations or the value of the signal-to-noise ratio tends to infinity. The theory
of asymptotically optimal algorithms is described in [33, 35].
The main idea of the asymptotic approach is that, in the asymptotics, the logarithm
of the statistics of the likelihood ratio is distributed according to Gaussian law, and the
nonparametric prior uncertainty transforms into a parametric one. At finite sample
sizes, only heuristic algorithms were proposed and analyzed.
The intermediate position between parametric and nonparametric signal detection
algorithms in conditions of a priori uncertainty is occupied by robust algorithms. The
main idea of constructing robust algorithms lies in the representation of nonpara-
metric a priori uncertainty by some model of the class of densities of the probability
distribution. Further, in a selected class of densities, a detection algorithm, param-
eter estimation or a filtering algorithm that minimizes the maximum degradation of
processing quality in this class is synthesized, that is, a minimax criterion is used.
The theory of robust statistical procedures is presented in [36, 37]. Reviews of
papers published before 1985 on problems of robust filtering, robust detection of
signals and estimation of their parameters are given in [38–40]. The main atten-
tion is paid to the minimax approach, which has gained the greatest use in the
synthesis of signal processing algorithms with stable characteristics under conditions
of nonparametric a priori uncertainty.
In the last decade, considerable success has been achieved in the application of
the principles of invariance, minimax and Bayesian approach to the synthesis of
optimal asymptotically invariant and asymptotically robust algorithms for detecting
and distinguishing signals that have high efficiency and a high degree of stability with
parametric a priori uncertainty, as well as asymptotically robust invariant (ARI) signal
detection and discrimination algorithms [28, 29]. Structurally, ARI algorithms do not
depend on all a priori unknown signal characteristics and interference and retain the
optimality property by the minimax criterion for any distribution of signal parameters.
Sufficiently, the asymptotic properties of ARI algorithms manifest themselves with
a large size of the observed sample—of the order of 200–250. Therefore, the scope
of the ARI algorithms is the systems that use complex signals with a large base.
The design of robust algorithms for estimating parameters of radio navigation
signals is based on reducing the problem of estimation to solving a parametric linear
or nonlinear regression problem [32]. This approach is discussed in more detail in
Sect. 6.2.8.
Application of the principle of adaptation. Adaptation as a way to reduce a priori
uncertainty is widely used in technical systems. Each level of a priori information
corresponds to one or another methodology for the synthesis of adaptive systems.
When processing signals and receiving messages often use the following problem
statement [41, 42], let the probability distribution density p(x|z, α) of the input imple-
mentation x(t), provided that the useful signal takes the value z, in the general case
depends on the interfering parameters α. The most complete information that can be
extracted from the observed implementation and a priori information contains the
posterior density of the probability distribution of the useful signal z. For its forma-
tion (in accordance with the Bayes formula), it is necessary to know the conditional
density p(x|z, α) and the prior density of the distribution of the probabilities of the
values of the useful signal and the interfering parameters p(z, α).
Consider the case when a priori information is not fully known, but there is a
classified or unclassified training sequence. There are four cases as follows:
1. p(x|z, α) and the classified training sequence are known.
2. p(x|z, α) and unclassified training sequence are known.
3. Only the classified learning sequence is known.
4. Only unclassified teaching sequence is known.
A classified training sequence is understood as a sequence of input implementa-
tions (processes) for which the useful signals contained in them are known. Systems
using classified sequences are referred to as learners (teacher training). The not
classified training sequence coincides with the sequence input to the system during
its operation. Systems that change their structure in accordance with the accepted
unclassified training sequence are called self-learning. By adaptation, it is meant
learning and self-learning, as well as the process of optimal restructuring of the
system structure in accordance with the chosen optimality criterion [41].
Since the interfering situation during the operation of sensors entering the NC is
constantly changing and the missing a priori information cannot be determined in
advance, when processing navigation information, it makes sense to consider only
self-learning processes, that is, cases 2 and 4.
Along with the tasks of signal processing, various problems that are of practical
use in aviation are also solved by the adaptation methods as follows:
1. automatic classification of signals and images [43–46] and pattern recognition
[47, 48];
2. identification of dynamic systems [49–53];
3. adaptive control of dynamic objects [54–57];
4. adaptive estimation (filtering and forecasting) of the states of a dynamic system
[31, 58–61].
In addition to the works mentioned, an extensive bibliography is given in [54].
The most developed adaptive approach is applied to the control tasks and the tasks
of estimating the states of dynamic objects. The general definition of a discrete in
time adaptive system, which makes it possible to consider all the above problems
from a unified methodological standpoint, is given in [61]. Below, Sect. 6.6 describes
in more detail the use of adaptive estimation algorithms for processing navigation
data.
Evaluation of a random process based on classical methods of mathematical
statistics and robust methods. By estimating a random process, we mean the math-
ematical procedure for deciding the values at some points in time of the random
process, that is, the mathematical procedure for processing the results of its measure-
ments [62]. The theory of estimation of random processes refers to the section of
mathematical statistics—the theory of statistical solutions. Often, other sections
of the theory of statistical solutions—the theory of detection, distinguishing and

resolving signals and estimating the constant parameters of signals [62] are included
in the theory of estimating random processes. Although formally such an approach
is possible, it should be recognized that in the listed sections of the theory of statis-
tical solutions, by now, specific methods have emerged that give these sections the
right to independent existence and development. Therefore, further on, the evalua-
tion of random processes is understood to mean a narrower area, related only to the
processing of the results of measuring changing signal parameters (“filtering random
processes”).
The theory of estimating random processes operates on mathematical models of
processes and dynamical systems. To describe them, the modern theory uses the
concept of the state space (phase space) [63]. In the general case, the state is deter-
mined by a set of data on the current and past values of the process and related vari-
ables (system coordinate), which, given the known characteristics of external distur-
bances, contain all the information necessary for describing the process (system) in
the future. The state is represented as an element (vector) − →
x of the space of state X.
The process that takes place in time is displayed as the movement of an element in
the state space. The description of the state vector − →
x dynamics is based on phys-
ical laws and is expressed by differential, difference and algebraic equations, which,
depending on the perturbations, can be deterministic or stochastic.
In addition to the description in the state space, other methods are used to describe
the processes, in particular, using transfer functions, frequency characteristics, spec-
tral densities, etc. All these forms on the basis of known single-valued transformations
are transformed into the form of a mathematical description of processes and systems
in the state space [62].
When describing the state vector − →x and the observation vector −→y by stochastic
differential or difference equations, the estimation problem is reduced to the recovery
of the vector from a known vector under certain restrictions on these vectors. In some
applications, the state or observation vector model may contain unknown parameters
among its components. Therefore, along with the estimation of the state vector, which
in this case is adaptive, there arises the task of simultaneously estimating its unknown
parameters, that is, the identification problem [64].
The most developed theory of estimating random processes, which allows
obtaining constructive results, is currently the Markov theory of estimation (MTE) of
random processes or its particular case—the Gaussian estimation theory. The bases
of this theory are presented in the fundamental works [62, 65–68], and the results of
solving a large number of problems of estimation by MTE methods are reflected in
the reviews [69, 70] and also systematized in [71].
MTE methods are mainly based on the Bayesian approach to decision-making
problems using the posterior probability density distribution of the state vector − →x,
which is sufficient statistics. In the Bayesian approach, it is assumed that the process
−
→x is random, a priori probability distribution density p(− →x ) of which exists and is
known to the observer. The optimal estimate is obtained by minimizing Bayesian

risk.
There are works on estimating random processes that use non-Bayesian estimation
methods—the maximum likelihood method and the minimax method [61, 68]. The
recurrent modification of the maximum likelihood method—the method of stochastic
approximation [57, 72]—has been widely developed.
One approach to solving the linear stochastic minimax filtering problem is using
the assumption that the spectral perturbation densities in the equations of state and
observation are unknown, but obey certain restrictions [73]. The most typical restric-
tions on perturbation in practical applications are restrictions on their moments
(dispersions, dispersions of derivatives, etc.) and on the region where the spectrum is
concentrated. The task of filter synthesis is to determine such a linear transformation
of the measured signal, which would in a certain sense give the best estimate of
some given linear transformation of the useful signal. The quality of various filters is
estimated by their guaranteed accuracy, which characterizes the accuracy of the eval-
uation when implementing the worst, among all the allowable, spectral perturbation
densities.
Another approach to minimax recurrent filtering, proposed in [61], will be
discussed below in Sect. 6.2.7.
The mentioned minimax estimation methods are based on probabilistic
(stochastic) interpretation of a priori uncertainty when it comes to any statistical
description of state and measurement. However, a very common situation is when
the a priori data on the unknown parameters of the system is minimal: There is no
statistical description of them, and only allowable areas for changing the unknown
values are given. In this situation, it is said about the undefined (or under-determined
[74]) nature of changing unknown values (only the sets to which the parameters
belong are given). The study of such situations of management leads to the theory
of management in conditions of uncertainty [75].
The solution of problems of this theory is achieved by invoking deterministic
minimax methods and game theory. The general setting of the problem is described
by the following scheme [75]. A system of ordinary differential equations with control
is considered.
ẋ = f (t, x, u, w), t0 ≤ t ≤ t1 , (6.1)
where the initial condition x(t0 ) and part of the functions describing the input actions
(disturbances in the system) are unknown in advance. For the mentioned quantities,
only a priori restrictions are specified—the permissible areas of their change. In this
case, each selected program control u(t) corresponds to not one specific trajectory
x(t), but a whole ensemble of trajectories (an “information tube” of motions) obtained
by combining solutions for all unknown quantities x(t0 ) and w(t). The control u(t)
is chosen so as to bring at once the whole “tube” of motions inside a given set,
simultaneously optimizing a certain quality criterion.
The task of observing in the presence of indefinite probabilities assumes that in
the general case the measurement process obeys the equation
y(t) = g(t, x, ξ ), (6.2)
where the values of ξ(t) are indefinite perturbations for which only a priori restriction
on the permissible ranges of their changes is known. It is required to construct such
a mapping , which, being applied to the measurement of y(t), t0 ≤ t ≤ t1 , gave the
best, by some criterion, approximation of the unknown true value of the phase vector
x(t1 ). If the mapping is built in advance, on the basis of a priori data about the
system and about the specified constraints, then we speak about program observation,
if is formed a posteriori—about positional observation [75].
The solution of the problem of positional observation with indefinite perturba-
tions is based on the construction in the phase space of some information set X (t1 ),
compatible with the signal y(t) and consisting of the ends of the trajectories of the
system (6.1, 6.2), which could, in principle, produce, together with some quantities
w(t), ξ(t), exactly the measured realization y(t). The unknown true state x(t1 ) of the
system is necessarily one of the elements of X (t1 ). For example, a point x̂(t1 ) ∈ X (t1 )
is taken as the optimal estimate, the maximum distance from which to the boundary
X (t1 ) is the minimum possible. The estimate x̂(t1 ) turns out to be minimax.
The method of observation based on the construction of information sets has now
found application in automatized ATC systems. Although these systems are related to
ground-based avionics, let us dwell on the corresponding formulation of the problem,
which is also of interest for airborne avionics [76].
In surveillance systems in air traffic control, the main task is to minimize the
possibility of disrupting observation, that is, the loss of the observed object (the so-
called guaranteed approach). The problem of increasing the accuracy of determining
the coordinates and motion parameters of the aircraft is relegated to the background
and is considered only from the point of view of achieving this basic goal. The
main reasons for the non-sustainability of observation are the loss of individual
measurements of coordinates and motion parameters, anomalous measurements and
maneuver of the target. Sources of uncertainty in the observation of the aircraft into
two groups are as follows:
1. external disturbing factors, erroneous actions of the crew or failures of airborne
systems of the aircraft, resulting in deviations from a given trajectory of move-
ment, changes in the nature and parameters of the observed trajectory in the
interval between neighboring discrete measurements;
2. errors in measuring the coordinates and parameters of movement, caused by
the influence of environmental factors, interference and errors of tools of
measurement, data transmission and processing systems.
The first group of factors is reflected in the state model (6.1) in the previously
unknown function w(t). The influence of interference is taken into account in advance
by the unknown function ξ (t), which is included in the equation of observations (6.2).
Both functions are considered to belong to the class of functions limited by certain
conditions.
In the tasks of observation in ATC in the simplest case, the constraints for the
function ξ (t), called geometric, have the form: μ1 (t) ≤ ξ(t) < μ2 (t). In contrast to
the probabilistic approach, knowledge of probabilistic characteristics is not assumed.
For the functions w(t), it is assumed that they belong to the class of piecewise
constant functions with a finite number of discontinuities, and the duration of the
segment of constancy w(t) is bounded below and above: ≤ i ≤ : w(t) =
const, t ∈ i . This is justified by the fact that, along a route, a route consists of a
finite number of sections in which the motion parameters either remain constant or
change at a rather slow pace [76].
Identification and classification based on math thematic statistics. The need
for identification is connected with the fact that any technical system is developed on
the basis of certain models as projections of that part of physical reality in which the
technical system must work. A model can simply be defined as a representation of
the essential aspects of a system, providing knowledge of this system in a convenient
form. The words “in a convenient form” emphasize the fact that the purpose of the
model and its potential application should be kept in mind. Among such areas of
application are the following:
1. interpretation of past behavior and generalization of existing knowledge,
limiting the number of essential parameters;
2. prediction of future behavior, including forecasting, determining trends,
checking stationarity;
3. accumulation of old and new knowledge, when a model based on a priori
information is updated and improved through the use of new measurements;
4. obtaining such knowledge about the process or system that is necessary for their
automatic control” [50].
In each case, the developer is asked what should be the requirements for the model
for each of its special applications.
By definition, Zadeh, “identification consists in finding, from the input and output
signals of a certain system, an equivalent system from a certain specified class”
[50]. Identification implies, firstly, the use of a priori information in determining the
structure of the model and, secondly, the processing of measurement data to obtain
the necessary a posteriori information about the system under study. In a schematic
form, which is also suitable for motion models used in aviation, the above is illustrated
in Fig. 6.5.
In aviation, the most interesting is the identification when processing data on
dynamic objects in the course of flight (as opposed to identification in the process
of synthesizing a control system). This type of identification, which we call current
identification, is necessary when using the so-called methods of indirect adaptive
control of the aircraft, when firstly the model parameters are estimated based on the
identification algorithm, and then, depending on the identification results, the control
vector is calculated [77, 78].
Identification is also used in the control of aircraft powerplant, in the tasks of
tracking enemy targets, in estimating the aerodynamic parameters of the aircraft,
etc. [23, 79–81].
Simulation error Linearization Aggregation

error error
Partial Partial
Physical laws Ordinary Structure
differential Linearizati differential
equations on equations Reduction differential
(non-linear) (linear) equations
Information about the

structure (a priori)
Input
noise
Object Model
Measurement information
(posterior)
Regularity
evaluation
Data regularity
Measurement processing Quantization
data Structure Parameter
Measurements estimation
Options
Measurement Quantization
error error State
assessment
States
Fig. 6.5 Scheme of formation and identification of the model
In the problem of current identification, we can highlight the following main tasks
[53]:
1. identification of the states of objects;
2. identification of models;
3. identification of observational data.
The task of identifying states is the most investigated. If the structure of the system
model is specified with an accuracy of up to the parameters (the case of a2 parametric
uncertainty regarding the model), then identification is understood as the estimation
of the system parameters.
The task of identifying models of dynamic objects is to build a model that is
optimal for a certain criterion, according to the observation data on input and output
variables. Depending on the a priori information about the object, the tasks of iden-
tifying models in a narrow and in a broad sense are distinguished. The task of iden-
tification in the narrow sense consists in estimating the unknown parameters of the
object from the observation data. In this case, it is assumed that the structure of the
system is known and the class of models to which this object belongs is specified.
When identifying a model in a broad sense, the tasks of choosing the system
structure and setting the class of models, determining the degree of linearity and
stationarity of the object, the degree and form of the influence of input variables on
the output, choosing informative parameters, etc., are solved. Identification tasks in
a broad sense are extremely complex [50].
The identification of observational data is necessary first of all in a situation
where a set of dynamic objects is monitored using a single measuring system. The
result of each observation from a sequence recorded by the system is a collection of
measurements of unknown a priori origin. Among these measurements can be both
measurements of states of objects and false measurements generated by noise. In
addition, there may be data gaps caused by both the action of measurement noise
and random changes in the properties of objects or the environment. The task of
identifying observational data consists in establishing a one-to-one correspondence
between measurements and objects of observation, which brings it closer to the task
of classifying objects.
When solving specific problems of the study of dynamic objects, the indicated
main identification tasks can be combined in various combinations.
Currently, in the tasks of current identification, the most developed is a recur-
rent approach to the construction of methods and algorithms, which implies the
construction of parameter estimates consistent in time with their refinement on the
last measurements obtained. Classical recurrent methods include [49, 50]:
• least square method;
• extended and generalized least squares methods;
• method of auxiliary variables;
• maximum likelihood method;
• reference model method;
• advanced Kalman filter;
• method based on the prediction error calculation.
Non-classical methods of identification include:

• modification of the maximum likelihood method, which provides an adjustment
of the bias in the estimates characteristic of the maximum likelihood method
(Akaike information criterion) [50];
• correlation methods;
• dispersion methods;
• minimax approach.
In the latter case, the identification problem is reduced either to the statistical
problem of minimax parameter estimation, or to the problem of minimax parameter
estimation, provided that some deterministic boundary conditions are set to change
the interference present in the observations.
“Classification is the division of the considered set of objects or phenomena into
homogeneous (in a certain sense) groups” [82]. Some researchers call the “pattern
recognition” a synonym for classification, although, as a rule, only the class number
to which the object belongs is sufficient in the classification, and identification is also
required in recognition—indicating the class name, for example, “S j useful signal
class”. The term “classification” is used to designate both the process of separation
of objects and its result.
When describing the set of statistically inspected objects {O1 , . . . , On }, the survey
results are presented, as a rule, in one of two forms:
1. “object-property” matrices of the form X = (X 1 , . . . , X n ), in which X i =
T
( p)
xi(1) , . . . , xi is a vector of values of the analyzed features (properties)
registered on the ith object;
2. matrices of pairwise comparisons of the form
⎡ ⎤
a11 . . . a1n
A = ⎣ . . . . . . . . . ⎦,
an1 . . . ann
where the element ai j determines the result of the comparison of objects Oi and
Oj in the sense of some given relation; ai j can express the measure of similarity or
difference of objects Oi and Oj , the measure of their connection or interaction in any
process, the geometric distance between objects, the relation of preference, etc.
Classification as a mathematical discipline is based on the following methodolog-
ical principles of multidimensional statistical analysis:
• the effect of substantial multidimensionality: the conclusions obtained as a result
of the analysis and classification of the set of objects {Oi , . . . , On } should
simultaneously be based on a set of interrelated properties with the obligatory
consideration of the structure and character of these properties;
• for the analyzed structure {Oi , . . . , On }, a priori there should be a small (compared
to p) number of determining factors with which they can be accurately described
as the observed characteristics of the analyzed objects (i.e., all elements of the
matrix X and A) and the nature of the connections between them and the desired
classification of the objects themselves. In this case, the determining factors may
be among the examined characteristics, or they may be latent, that is, not directly
observable, but reconstructed from source data of the form X or A;
• maximum use of training in setting up mathematical classification models;
• optimization formulation of classification tasks: Among the many possible
methods that implement the goal of statistical data processing (splitting the aggre-
gate of statistically inspected objects into homogeneous classes, moving from a
given wide range of attributes to a small number of determining factors—reducing
the size), you need to be able to find a method best by some given criterion.
To generalize and order a huge number of existing classification algorithms,
approaches are proposed to build a general theory of automatic classification by
introducing the concepts of the state space of objects, the description space (class
kernels), the portion generator, through which objects are received for the classi-
fication, the operator that determines what needs to be done with the objects for
Table 6.1 The tasks of classification, depending on a priori and preliminary selective information
A priori information on Preliminary selected information
classes (general Lack of information The presence of Availability of
populations) partially training training samples
samples
1. The laws of Testing statistical No training samples needed
probability hypotheses
distribution of
populations are
fully known
2. The laws of Interpretation of the Methods of splitting Parametric methods
probability studied population as the mixture, of discriminant
distribution of a mixture of several supplemented by analysis
populations are populations. Splitting estimates obtained
known to within of this mixture by from partially training
unknown identifying the samples
parameters components of the
mixture
3. General Classification without Cluster analysis Nonparametric
assumptions about training: cluster methods, methods of
the properties of the analysis, taxonomy, supplemented by a discriminant analysis
law of probability pattern recognition selection based on
distribution without a teacher, partially training
(smoothness, hierarchical samples of initial
concentration in a classification approximations of the
certain area, etc.) procedures number, centers and
class sizes
classification [82]. This general approach allows combining both probabilistic clas-
sification methods and methods based on geometric representations (e.g., the method
of dynamic condensations [83]).
The tasks of classification, depending on a priori and preliminary selective
information, are divided into several types, presented in Table 6.1 [82].
The classification of classes according to the form of the initial information and
the corresponding models, as well as the classification methods are given in [82].
One of the types of applied problems that occur in aviation is the classification of
the dynamic trajectories of the system. In these tasks, the characteristics of the aircraft
dynamics are used as classified objects. In radar, these tasks are known as the tasks
of “detecting moving objects” [84]. The heuristic approach to their solution, called
“tertiary” information processing, is developed in [85]. In this work, the problem of
classifying trajectories is solved on the basis of combining information from several
sources, in which the identification of trajectories obtained from several sources for
the same purpose is carried out, and the parameters of the combined trajectories are
calculated.
The general theoretical formulation and solution of the problem of detecting
moving objects on the basis of the theory of statistical solutions are considered in
[84]. In this paper, the mathematical problem is formulated as the statistical problem
of detecting and estimating the parameters of a random flow of objects based on

the information contained in the signal flow statistically associated with it. Objects
are considered as appearing, moving and disappearing from the controlled zone
observation of radar tools, that is, from a mathematical point of view, the situation in
zone relative to which the decision is made, changes over time as a random process.
Sequential decision-making about the situation in based on repeated observations
is one of the varieties of problems of estimating a random process from random
observable data with specific probabilistic characteristics.
The solution of the problem of “detecting and estimating” the parameters of
moving objects is carried out by analyzing the evolution of a posteriori characteristics
of Markov processes, sequential detection of randomly occurring events using the
methods of the theory of random flows and the theory of information.
There is another approach to the classification (identification) of trajectories that
does not use probabilistic representations, but is based on the construction of infor-
mation sets [75, 76]. In this approach, trajectory identification is carried out under
the following assumptions:
• measurement errors do not exceed the limits of a priori known limitations;
• true motion corresponds to a describing function of a previously known type (e.g.,
a polynomial of a known order).
In this case, trajectories corresponding to the information set (“information tube”)
are constructed for this object. In case of successive receipt of new measurements,
the information set may change, and, consequently, the information tube changes.
When the type of the true trajectory changes as compared with the describing func-
tion based on the analysis of new measurements, a transition to another describing
function occurs. To ensure a smooth transition, several information sets (respectively,
information tubes) can be built in parallel, and a transition is made to the information
set that most closely matches the true movement.
Fusion data. During the flight of the aircraft, processing of heterogeneous
information from different sensors is required:
• to determine the current position and orientation of the aircraft in the airspace
(FMCS work as part of the navigation system);
• for the isolation and identification of ground objects (various elevations, airfields,
individual buildings, areas with characteristic buildings, etc.);
• for laying safe routes of the aircraft or for guiding it to enemy ground targets for
combat use;
• to isolate and identify moving objects, determine their current coordinates and
orientation in order to prevent collisions or targeting during combat use.
When solving navigation problems, the information in the navigation complex
must be received continuously and to the extent necessary for the implementation
of the current flight mode and to meet the requirements for accuracy and informa-
tion reliability [86]. None of the used sensors, taken separately, meets the specified
requirements; therefore, there is a need to install on board several navigation sensors
combined by an air navigation computer, which performs complex processing of

information.
Complex processing of information is carried out in solving problems of FMC at
all stages of flight (see Sect. 3.2.7). It is one of the implementations of the principle of
functional integration in airborne avionics. The principles of CPI are discussed below
in Sect. 6.4. Currently, methods of complex processing of information from various
sensors [87–89] have been studied and implemented in detail: inertial systems, course
verticals, DSDM, RSBN, RSDN, altimeters, SRNS consumers, astro-directional
devices, review-comparative systems navigation, airborne radar, etc. The complexing
of navigation sensors can be carried out both when using separate sensors in the NC
and in hardware integrated equipment. However, CPI algorithms should, if possible,
take into account the degree and features of hardware integration of avionics.
When developing algorithms for a complex navigation system, two main groups
of tasks arise. The first are the geometrical tasks of calculating the current coordinates
of the aircraft from the signals of the positional navigation sensors (SRNS, RSBN,
RSDN, etc.) and the numbering task from the readings of the velocity and acceleration
meters. The second are the tasks of statistical filtering of sensor errors. To solve
these problems, it is necessary to have sufficiently reliable mathematical models of
navigation sensor errors.
The conducted studies allowed forming mathematical models in the form of
stochastic equations for most navigation sensors. On the basis of their use, a signifi-
cant number of problems of complex processing of navigation information have been
solved by the methods of Markov estimation theory [see, for example, 87].
Complex processing of navigation information is one of the directions of an exten-
sive group of methods, defined by the term “data fusion” [90, 91]. These methods
are widely implemented in a number of military, industrial and commercial appli-
cations, especially in connection with processing multi-sensor data fusion (MSDF)
data streams. From a system point of view, the implementation of data fusion is a
functional integration of the navigation system. Fundamentally, in solving all the
signal and data processing problems discussed above, data merging can be used.
MSDF is a combination of data from several sensors in order to create the best
and most useful description of the environment in which these sensors work. The
natural ability to combine data has evolved to a high degree in some animal species,
including humans. Based on information from the five senses, we interact with the
environment and make decisions regarding our present and future actions.
In recent years, the development of artificial sensor systems, equipped with the
ability to combine data that mimic some human capabilities, has appeared. Such
systems are becoming increasingly complex. In the field of propagation and the
sphere of its action (e.g., in different frequency ranges of electromagnetic waves),
such artificial systems greatly exceed the capabilities of human senses.
Some individual aspects and functionality of MSDF have been used in a wide
range of applications for quite a long time. However, only relatively recently, MSDF
methods began to be considered as an integral process that includes several levels of
data processing.
Also, relatively recently, emphasis has been placed on merging other, non-sensory,
information, such as data from directly observed messages, databases and commu-
nication channels. The acronym MSDF in this case is often used to merge data from
many sources (multi-source data fusion).
The modern definition of fusion as a process emphasizes three central aspects of
this method [92]:
• Data is merged at different levels of data presentation.
• The process of data fusion includes the detection, combination, correlation,
estimation and combination of data.
• The results of data fusion include state estimation and feature classification at
lower levels and an assessment of the general situation at upper levels.
There are many advantages to using multiple sensors [90]:

• robustness and reliability—the system is operational, even if one or several sensors
fail;
• extended spatial and temporal coverage;
• the increased dimension of the measurement space (e.g., different parts of the
electromagnetic spectrum) reduces the vulnerability of the system;
• reduced uncertainty—several independent measurements of one quantity are
made;
• reduced ambiguity—more complete information provides a better distinction
between possible hypotheses;
• improved detection performance.
In addition, the data fusion from individual sensors or other data sources allows
people—operators to make decisions with a high density of information flows when
this information is not processed without fusion.
An example of the implementation of the integrated MSDF is the helicopter flight
safety system investigated in [93]. This system involves the fusion of the output
of several spatially separated sensors engaged in real-time tracking of obstacles in
the environment, which can be used as an aid in flight control or as part of an
automatic collision avoidance system. This system should operate in bad weather
and visibility, with nonlinear dynamics of movement of obstacles, as well as use
data from communication lines, maps of the area and weather reports. To ensure
the necessary coverage and reliability of the system, the following sensors were
selected: INS, RA, ADS, ACAS, terrain database, GPS receiver, microwave radar
and millimeter wave radar.
A striking example of data fusion is multichannel processing (detection, identifi-
cation, parameter estimation) of signals from all visible GNSS satellites, carried out
in modern airborne GNSS equipment to solve the navigation problem and verify the
integrity of navigation information [94, 95].
In terms of the application on board a modern military aircraft of various means of

detecting targets (radar, laser, infrared), the task of complex classification of signals—
testing simple or complex hypotheses based on data from several meters—is an urgent
task [96].
In tasks related to the control and management of a set of dynamic objects,
there is a need for multiple identification [53, 97]. The increasing complexity of
the identification tasks caused by the increase in the number of objects observed
is not only quantitative, but also qualitative. The division of such a multi-object
task into a number of independent tasks of identification of individual objects is
often impossible without loss of information. To improve the efficiency of multiple
identification, for example, enemy targets or aircraft observed by the ATC service,
modern aviation uses multichannel information-measuring systems of various phys-
ical principles (radiotechnical, optical, optical-electronic, etc.), which are recorded
at successive moments the time of measuring the state of objects without fixing the
correspondence between the measurements and the observed objects.
Thus, for the quantitative solution of the problem of multiple identification with the
merging of data from various measurement channels, the use of special identification
methods is required.
The most common is the Bayesian approach to the problem of multiple identifica-
tion. In the general case, solving the problem of identifying states and measurements
of many objects in the Bayesian approach is reduced to determining the relations
for the a posteriori density of the probability distribution of the states of objects and
the a posteriori probability distribution of measurement identification hypotheses
that take into account the interfering effect of the unobserved process, random
implementations of which are integer combinations of object numbers [53].
An example of multiple data fusion identification is multisensory surveillance in
ATC, considered as the joint use of radar data and surveillance sources [76]. The
general problem of multisensory observation in this application area is divided into
a number of tasks:
• estimation of state parameters (coordinates and motion parameters);
• comparative assessment of the reliability of information obtained from various
sources;
• building integrated trajectories and ensuring their continuity (“docking”);
• recalculation of measurements into a single coordinate system;
• reduction of measurements to a single time.
A special case of multisensory surveillance is multidimensional processing. It is
based on the introduction of some fictitious observer—a virtual radar, which produces
multiradar trajectories, calculated using special algorithms. This method is quite
versatile and can be applied both in the case of homogeneous meters (e.g., surveil-
lance radars) and in the presence of heterogeneous sources of information, which is
the case with the combined use of dependent surveillance and radar control, as well
as radio direction finders.
Multisensor information can be merged using probabilistic algorithms, as well
as on the basis of information sets. The multisensor processing algorithm based on
information sets in the case of n homogeneous sensors is constructed as follows [76].

The information set of one of the real radars can be taken as the information set of
the virtual radar at the initial moment t 0 . For the moments of time t > t0 , information
sets are built using recurrent procedures.
Let the information set I0 (t1 ) be built at time t1 , and at time t2 > t1 —the first one,
to which the next measurement from the kth meter (k = 1, …, n) has come, is built an
information set for this meter Ik (t2 ). For the remaining gages, including the virtual
radar, the prediction sets G j (t2 ), j ∈ (0, 1, . . . , n), j = k are built as reachable sets
at the time t2 . The information set I0 (t2 ) for a virtual radar at time t2 is defined as
the intersection of the sets of the forecast G j (t2 ) with the constructed information
set Ik (t2 ).
One of the main tasks that now attracts the attention of researchers to the fusion of
data (functional integration) focuses on the use of all existing methods and technolo-
gies for a rational combination of hardware and functional integration. The solution
to this problem includes the creation of standards for the presentation, communica-
tion and interaction of data and architecture that will support the merging of many
different types of data at multiple levels of information presentation. The integrated
structure should also support decision-making methods that should be used with alter-
native algorithms and which should dynamically provide a feedback mechanism for
modifying sensor parameters or processing algorithms, if and when required.
When translating a functional structure to a technical structure by assigning merge
functions to physical nodes connected by interfaces to a data fusion system, it is
usually necessary to consider the following aspects of an integrated system:
• system performance (latency, concurrency, supported speed);
• centralized or distributed signal processing;
• centralized or distributed state estimation;
• centralized or distributed storage and selection in the common database;
• message traffic restrictions (routing, bandwidth, delay).
The range of sensors available to developers of airborne equipment is very
wide. For example, in the field of military sensors, it may include various airborne
radar monitoring and fire control stations, infrared search-tracking and image
sensors, optical-electronic sensors, “friend-to-foe” (IFF) state recognition equip-
ment, acoustic sensors, etc. New types of sensors are being developed all the time.
Part of the overall data fusion structure is a combination of sensor data with informa-
tion from various other sources, such as databases, messages from human operators
that are directly connected to the system (human intelligence), as well as information
transmitted over communication lines from external world (coherent intelligence).
Databases can contain previously acquired knowledge domains, such as informa-
tion about the physical environment or about the position, characteristics and current
or future behavior of objects in this environment—terrain profile data, meteorolog-
ical data and aircraft information. This information can be compared with sensor data
to provide model-based identification of objects or their capabilities. At any time,
the characteristic of the behavior observed by the sensors can be identified as one of
the types stored in memory (e.g., a low-flying aircraft following the railway track)
and used to increase the efficiency of the object tracking process by choosing the
most appropriate algorithm. The database and the control system of this database are
designed to support the efficient storage and operation of data and efficient search
and query algorithms.
The growing number of sensors and other sources of information, the increasing
complexity of various merge algorithms, are placing new demands on the processing
performance in merge systems. The distributed architecture of the integrated data
processing system has advantages over other variants of the architecture, providing a
reduction in the system’s vulnerability to damage or failure of any of its components.
An example of the use of data fusion technology is Tactical Air Warfare (TACAIR)
[90]. This type of tactical tasks, primarily aimed at single-seat fighter aircraft, requires
the merging of a significant amount of data. This volume of data comes from a large
number of sensors, such as electro-optical and infrared imagers and various radar
modes deployed on each fighter, as well as on other aircraft, including AWACS.
In addition, various communication channels and ground sensors add a stream of
information that is provided to the crew in an appropriate form for evaluation and
quick action. An integrated data fusion system capable of connecting data streams,
resolving conflicts, reducing uncertainty and correctly integrating sensor data to
ensure awareness of the situation in support of high-level decision-making is the
only way to solve these tactical tasks.
Some of the capabilities developed for the military sector have obvious appli-
cations in the relevant civilian sectors—air traffic control and landing gear in the
aerospace field, ship docking at ports, automatic control of vehicles and other ground-
based vehicles (road or general navigation, collision avoidance and parking). The
conventional field of application for the fusion of these sensors is robotics.
Many firms—developers of airborne avionics are engaged in the creation of struc-
tures for the fusion of information at various levels—from the level of sensors to the
fusion of high-level information. An example is the creation of the multisensor data
fusion framework at the GEC-Marconi Research Center (GMRG), which includes
the development of a toolbox filled with models of the main fusion functions, such as
signal processing, state estimation, object classification, situation evaluation, sensor
technologies and application scenarios. The goal is to combine the development
of general methods and algorithms for data fusion with the study of key specific
applications of interest to f. GEC-Marconi in the present and future [92].
Intensive research is being done in the field of creating communication environ-
ments that provide data fusion. Work on OSDI and OSCAR programs subsidized
by the US DoD in the interests of Air Force and Navy aviation is devoted to this
problem. About twenty standard interfaces are considered as architectural solutions
capable of supporting communication between scalable and portable components
of airborne information and computing systems (e.g., FDDI, fiber channel, ATM,
firewire, etc.) [98].
The tasks of the communication environment connecting sensors with airborne
computing tools are, in addition to data transmission, reducing the amount of
insignificant information coming from the sensors and impairing the performance of
computing tools. To do this, the communication environment should become intelli-

gent by filtering current data, changing priorities or suppressing repetitive and irrel-
evant information using logic inference, which can include fuzzy logic algorithms,
neural network algorithms and expert estimation.
In a sense, the technology of data fusion from many sources is a continuation of a
very important stage, when some developed methods and approaches were integrated
at various levels of creating systems for integrated data and information processing.
Such systems should be able to fully and effectively combine data to update the
knowledge and information that is necessary for effective decision-making.
Concluding a brief overview of modern approaches to the processing of informa-
tion in the FNC, we now turn to specific algorithms for joint data processing in the
avionics of the navigation system. The general requirement for the algorithms used
in the navigation system can be formulated as ensuring the specified accuracy of
solving the navigation problem while maintaining resistance to disturbances (uncer-
tainties) in the external environment and in the equipment itself. Modern methods of
information processing provide a rich set of tools for developing such algorithms.
6.2 Functional Structure of the Unit for Processing Radio

Navigation Signals
6.2.1 Formulation of the Synthesis Problem
In Chap. 5, we reviewed the basic algorithms for the shaping and processing of radio
navigation signals, signals for data exchange systems in avionics, which are deter-
mined by the format of the systems signals, international and domestic standards.
However, the question of optimizing these algorithms under the effect of interference
characteristic of the analyzed systems was not raised. This topic is so extensive that
it is not possible to present it in one work. However, when determining the principles
of building an integrated avionics, it is necessary to rely on some generalized ideas
about the signal processing in the avionics of the systems under consideration. To
do this, we define the general functional structure of the signal processing unit of
radio beacon navigation systems (ILS, VOR, RSBN, PRMG, MLS, DME) and the
MCD system close to them based on the mathematical formulation of the detection-
measurement task [32]. The results of this section are general in nature and can be
extended to the processing of signals from other radio navigation systems that satisfy
the restrictions introduced below.
The synthesis of optimal devices for processing radio navigation signals in general
is part of the task of optimizing the motion control of an aircraft as a dynamic system.
The control problem contains the problem of estimating the phase coordinates of a
dynamic system, which is often called the filtering problem. On modern aircrafts,
control with concomitant filtering is carried out using algorithms requiring the use
of airborne computers (data processors), which at discrete points in time receive
information from sensors, process it and give out control signals at discrete points
in time. Therefore, below we will consider only the problems of discrete control
and discrete filtering, within which the phase coordinates and controls are described,
−
→
respectively, by vectors −→
ρk and Uk .
From the theory of optimal discrete control, a number of facts follow, which are
basic for solving the filtering problem [24].
−→
1. With fixed vectors Uk , i.e., in open dynamic systems, a sequence − →
ρk is a
Markov random sequence. In closed dynamic systems (in the presence of feed-
backs through LA), the sequence − →
ρk is Markovian, if the random processes
that disturb the system at non-intersecting time intervals are statistically inde-
pendent. The latter almost always takes place with discrete measurements of
navigation parameters.
2. The control and filtering algorithms are implemented in the form of recurrent
procedures, which can be obtained under the following conditions:
(a) the posterior probability density − →
ρk depends on observations xk , . . . , x0
−
→
only through a vector dk of sufficient statistics;
−
→ −
→
(b) for fixed Uk , the sequence dk is Markov.
If −
→x are independent observations and the initial vector does not depend on them,
k
then any recurrent estimates form a Markov sequence [72]. In particular, this is true
−
→
for consistency dk . Since − →
ρk the navigation problems also form a Markov sequence,
then the measurement ρk = ρˆk − −
−
→ →
ρk errors form a Markov sequence.
The fulfillment of conditions (a) and (b) ensures the applicability of the so-called
separation principle: The general algorithm of optimal control is divided into the
−
→
recurrent estimation
−−→ − algorithm, which determines the vectors dk and transition prob-
→
abilities Pk+1 dk+1 dk ), and the algorithm for calculating optimal controls. Thus,
for airborne radio navigation equipment, the task of signal processing is reduced to
a recurrent calculation of a posteriori probability densities, which are functions of
sufficient statistics and transition densities of probabilities.
At present, the Markov theory of estimation of random processes [62, 65–68] is
the most developed and universal method for the synthesis of estimation algorithms.
Therefore, further definition of the functional structure of the device for processing
radio navigation signals will be based on the well-known results of this theory, taking
into account the features of signals and interference operating in pulsed radio beacon
navigation systems.
In the classical formulation of optimal estimation problems, it is usually assumed
that a sufficiently large amount of information about useful signals, interference and
their interaction is known. However, in practice, the amount of a priori data can be
very limited. The solution of a number of problems of optimal processing of radio
signals in the presence of unpredictable interference of external origin in observation
showed that radio signal processing devices should include blocks for identifying the
type of interference, estimating their parameters and subsequent autocompensation.
Given the wide variety of external disturbances and intervals of possible values
6.2 Functional Structure of the Unit for Processing Radio … 279
of their parameters, optimal processing devices within the framework of Markov

theory are usually synthesized under the assumption that useful signals are observed
against the background of noise interference, and the influence of external occurrence
interference is estimated based on the analysis operability of synthesized circuits [62].
Following this method, we consider the formulation and solution of the problem of
optimal estimation of signal parameters under conditions characteristic of the RNS.
A feature of most radio navigation systems is the operation of their avionics under
conditions of the disappearance and appearance of signals. Algorithms for processing
appearing and disappearing signals are synthesized as unified algorithms for joint
detection-estimation or testing of complex hypotheses. In the literature, two classes
of such algorithms are considered—for stationary or slow-moving objects and for
quickly moving objects, for example, in radar for many purposes and in elementary
particle physics. Algorithms designed for fast moving objects are very complex and
require high performance computing tools [84].
At the same time, during the operation of the RNS, the change in the coordinates of
the aircraft for the period of receipt of signals is commensurate with the permissible
errors in measuring the coordinates. An additional set of signals in angular channels
may arise as a result of reflections or the action of the director of the active distractor,
but it will not be in the nature of a random stream. In distance measuring channels,
when simultaneously operating with a radio beacon of a large number of aircraft at the
input of the avionics of this aircraft, a stream of response ranging signals may occur.
However, for the processing device, the “alien” response signals will be a chaotic
sequence of pulses. Tracking them is not the task of the avionics of this aircraft, and,
therefore, this sequence should be considered as a chaotic pulse interference.
Thus, when synthesizing the structure of a unit for processing radio navigation
signals, it is sufficient to restrict ourselves to searching and detecting emerging
signals, considering their parameters to be constant during detection and changing
these parameters to be taken into account in the tracking process after the decision
on detection is made.
As already mentioned, the optimal processing unit must implement a recur-
rent algorithm for the formation of the aposteriori probability distribution of signal
parameters. Further, this unit uses one of the detection criteria, for example, the
Neumann–Pearson criterion, and the evaluation criteria.
The problems of the synthesis of recurrent joint detection-estimation algorithms
(detection filtering, testing complex hypotheses, etc.) are devoted to a consider-
able number of works. In particular, algorithms for optimal discrete identification
and adaptive estimation for conditional Gaussian processes were obtained in [62],
however, only equations of state and observation that are linear with respect to the
state vector are considered. The following formulation of the problem and its solution
are based on [33, 67, 97, 99].
Let the sequence of implementations of a random process come to the input of
the processing unit,
−
→ −
→
xk (t) = β S θk (t), K k (t), t + n k (t), k = 1, 2, . . . (6.3)
−
→ −
→
where S θk (t), K k (t), t is the useful beacon signal, which depends in the kth repeti-
−
→
tion period Tn on θk (t) the implementation of the time-varying vector of informative
−
→ −→
parameters θk (t) of dimension m1 and the realization of the vector K k (t) of non-
−
→ −
→
informative parameters K (t) of dimension m 2 . To relate the parameters θ (t) to
the vector of navigation parameters − →ρ (t) of dimension m ≥ m , we introduce
3 1
the matrix H, consisting of zeros and ones and showing which vector components
−
→
participate in the signal modulation: θ (t) = H −→
ρ (t). We also introduce a vector
−
→ −
→ −
→
α (t) of dimension m 4 , combining ρ (t) and K (t), and vector
−
→ −
→ −
→
μ (t) = Y −
→
α (t) = θ (t), K (t) , where Y = {H, I }. (6.4)
In the observation Eq. (6.3), n k (t), there is a realization of Gaussian white noise
with zero mean and the known covariance function n(t)n(t + τ ) = N0 δ(τ )/2,
which is statistically independent of the β parameters and − →α (t).
−
→
We next consider the process Z (t) = ( α (t), β), whose values belong to the set
{β = 0, (β = 1, − →α (t))}. Element β = 0 is identified with the fact of the absence
of a signal, the element (β = 1, − →α (t)) with the fact of the presence of a signal
−
→
with parameters α (t). To solve the synthesis problem, a priori statistics of the Z (t)
process must be specified. We will consider the vector − →ρ (t) as m 3 -dimensional
Markov process. To describe this process in radio navigation, several models (state
equations) are used, taking into account the random nature of changes in navigation
parameters due to the inertia of the aircraft during its evolution, the influence of
−
→
atmospheric turbulence, shaking, etc. [85, 96]. The vector θ , like the vector of non-
−
→
informative parameters K , is a Markov process. Consequently, the entire vector
−
→α (t) is a Markov process.
The process − →α (t) of radio navigation in continuous time with a sufficient degree
of accuracy can be described by the equation [97]
d−
→
α (t) −
→
= J−
→
α (t) + g ξ (t), −
→
α (t0 ) = −
→
α (0) (6.5)
dt
−
→
where ξ (t) is the vector normal white noise with zero mean and covariance matrix <
→ −
− →
ξ (t)ξ T T (t + τ ) >= I δ(τ ), I is the identity matrix, and g and J are constant
matrices. The solution of Eq. (6.5) is
−
→ −
→
α (t) = (t0 , t)−
→
α (0) + ζ (t), (6.6)
where (t0 , t) is a transition matrix that satisfies the equation
d(t0 , t)
= J (t0 , t); (t0 , t0 ) = I ;
dt
t
−
→ −
→
a vector ζ (t) = (τ, t)g ξ (τ )dτ,
0
has zero mean and covariance matrix

t
→ −
− →
Q(τ ) = ζ (t)ζ T (t + τ ) = (τ1 , τ )gg T T
(τ1 , τ )dτ1 .
0
6.2.2 A Recurrent Algorithm for Transforming a Posteriori

Probability Density
We assume that the measurement of the components of a continuous vector process

occurs at discrete moments of time tk = t0 + kTn . In this case, the values can
be considered −→
αk (t) equal to the values of the vector continuous-valued Markov
sequence. Then from (6.6) follows
−
→ −
→
α (k) = (k, k − 1)−
→
α (k − 1) + ζ (k − 1)
where (k, k − 1) = (tk−1 , tk );
tk
−
→ −
→
ζ (k) = (τ1 , tk ) g ξ (τ1 )dτ1
tk−1

→ −
− →
Q(k) = ξ (k)ζ (k) ;
T
−
→ →
α (0) = −α (t0 ) ;
− → − → T
P(0) = →
α (0) − − α (0) →
α (0) − −
α (0) .
−
→ −
→
Random variables ζ (k) are called discrete white noise. If k = i, then ζ (k)
−
→
and ζ (i) are uncorrelated, since they are formed from non-overlapping in time
−
→
samples of white noise ξ (t). With constant J and g corresponding to the model
(6.5), Q(k) = Q, (k, k − 1) = .
The multidimensional probability distribution of values of {−
→
α (k)}, k = 0, . . . , n
when β = 1 in the stationary case, when the transition probabilities from − →α (k − 1)
−
→
to α (k) depend not on tk , tk−1 , but only on tk − tk−1 ≈ Tn , is equal to:
W − →
α (0), . . . , −
→
α (n)|β = 1 = w(− →α (n)|−
→
α (n − 1)) w(−→α (n − 1)|−→α (n − 2)) ×
−
→ −
→ −
→ −
→ −
→
· · · × w( α (1)| α (0))w( α (0)), where w( α (k)| α (k − 1)) is the transition density
of the probability distribution of state changes −
→
α (k − 1) on −→α (k) for the period T.
Taking into account the structure of the process Z (t), we also introduce the
following transition probabilities: w(0|0) is the probability of a signal not appearing
α (k)|0) = wa (−
in T if it was absent; w(1, −
→ →
α (k)) is the probability of the appearance
−
→
of a signal with parameters α (k) in the kth period, if it was absent; wd (−
→
α (k − 1)) =
−
→
w(0|1, α (k − 1)) is the probability that the signal disappears in the kth period if it
was present in the (k − 1)th period and its parameters were equal − →α (k − 1). At that,
the normalization conditions occur
→ −
w(0|0) + wa −
α (k) d→
α (k) = 1;
→ → →
wd −
α (k − 1) + w −
α (k)|−
→
α (k − 1) d−
α (k) = 1.
In each period Tp, the a posteriori probability distribution density (AR) of Wk (Z )

can be calculated using the Stratonovich recurrent algorithm [33]:
Wk (Z ) = Wke (Z )W (xk |Z )/ Wke (Z )W (xk |Z )dZ ; (6.7a)

Wke (Z ) = w Z |Z Wk−1 Z dZ . (6.7b)
This algorithm consists of two parts. Formula (6.7b) describes the extrapolation
of the automatic reclosing for time T ahead based on the Wk−1 (Z ) generated by the
time tk−1 and the prior transition probability. At time tk , the signal x k is received and,
using the likelihood function W (xk |Z ), the automatic reclosure Wk (Z ) is formed,
for which Wke (Z ) acts as an a priori probability density. At time t0 , the probability
distribution on the set of values of Z (t) is given by the prior probabilities W00 of the
absence of a signal and W01 (−→α (0)) of the presence
of a signal with parameters − →α (0),
−
→ −
→
moreover, due to the normalization of W00 + W01 ( α (0))d α (0) = 1. Further, the
probabilities Wk0 and Wk1 are refined in the observation process.
Let xk (t) be represented by the sample χk = {xk1 , xk2 , . . . , xk N } at discrete points
in time tk . Then the likelihood function in the presence and absence of a signal, as
well as the likelihood ratio (OD), is, respectively,
→
W1 χk | 1, −
α (k) ; W0 (χk |0),
→
N −
α (k) = W1 χk |(1, −
→
α (k) )W0 (χk |0). (6.8)
From (6.7a, 6.7b), taking into account the automatic reclosure of the presence and
absence of a signal in the kth period, we obtain the expressions for the automatic
reclosing of the presence of the signal Wk1 and the extrapolated automatic reclosing
of the presence of the signal Wke1 :
→ → −
Wk1 −
α (k) = Ck Wke1 −
α (k) N →
α (k) ; (6.9a)
→ → − →
Wke1 −
α (k) = wa −
α (k) + w →α (k)|−
→
α (k − 1) − wa −
α (k)
→ →
× W(k−1)1 −
α (k − 1) d−
α (k − 1), (6.9b)

when Ck = 1/[1 + Wke1 (− →α (k)) N (−
→
α (k))d− →α (k)]—normalization factor
−
→
independent of α (k).
Formulas (6.8, 6.9a, 6.9b) describe the complete recurrent algorithm for the forma-
tion of automatic reclosing for the purpose of detecting and measuring parameters
of radio navigation signals. Formula (6.9a) expresses the process of combining a
priori (at the time tk ) information with the new information contained in the sample
χk . The role of the prior distribution is played by the density −
→
−
→ Wke1 ( α (k)). The new
information is enclosed in terms of likelihood N α (k) . Formula (6.9b) describes
the formation of APD in the interval between signals.
With a constant parameter − →
α and a large signal-to-noise ratio q, the likelihood
−
→
ratio N ( α ) or, with a continuous signal, the likelihood ratio functional (FLR)
(− →α ) has a regular part in the form of a single peak, rising above a random back-
ground. With a small q, anomalous outliers with a high probability appear, and the
values of max , with the presence and absence of a signal, approach each other. For
−
→
a time-varying parameter vector (t), the LR is also a function of time. For periods
of time that are significantly longer than the statistical communication interval of
−
→
the slowest of the uninformative parameters K (t), but considerably smaller than the
−
→
interval of change (t), the OD as a function of the parameter values frozen in these
segments near the main peak can be represented the same way as for the constant
parameter. In contrast to the constant parameter, the OD peak in each subinterval has
a finite width, randomly dependent on x(t).
When a signal appears, the probability density W k1 becomes proportional to the
OD. Extrapolated for the next period, the probability of the absence of a signal is a
small value that is proportional to the transition probability of no occurrence of the
signal w(0|0). The peak of the extrapolated density of the probability of the presence
of a signal over the time Tn expands, varies in amplitude and shifts relative to the
true value −→, and with a significant shift of W in the kth period, a new peak may
α E ke1
appear. When the signal of the APD reclosing signal is lost, the signal becomes equal
to zero.
The algorithm, based on the recurrent conversion formula of the automatic
reclosing, reflects the principle of processing, but is not very suitable for imple-
mentation. To obtain a realizable algorithm, one should proceed to the recurrent
formation of estimates using the a posteriori probability maximum method (APM).
Let us complete the procedure described by comparing a posteriori peaks with
thresholds and discarding a part of the distribution that is less than the thresholds.
By analyzing peaks exceeding the search threshold, we will search and search for
a signal in order to determine the moment of its appearance and obtain a vector − →
αi
of initial estimates of signal parameters. Note that, in the general case, the detection
algorithm, which consists in forming an APD reclosing signal for the presence of
a signal and comparing it with a threshold, is the optimal algorithm for detecting
an appearing object [84]. When making a decision on the detection of a signal, the
coordinates of the maximum of the peaks of the APD are taken as a vector − →
αi . Then
the vector of extrapolated estimates is calculated. Estimates in the next period are
based on extrapolated estimates and on the information contained in the LR. During
the entire operation of the processing device, the LR is also compared with the control
threshold. The decision about the disappearance of a signal is made on the first failure
of the control threshold during the measurement mode.
Note that the process of the evolution of the APD was considered in [33] for
the radar case, taking into account the appearance of new signals, but with a zero
probability of their disappearance. In [97], an example of the evolution of APD is
given for a signal with two parameters, but without taking into account its appearance
and disappearance.
6.2.3 The Recurrent Algorithm of the APM-Estimation

with the Poly-Gaussian Approximation
Let us proceed to the derivation of the equations for the estimates using the above
analysis of the evolution of APD. The Markov vector process − →α (t) described by
−
→
Eq. (6.5), by virtue of the Gaussian distribution, ξ (t) is also Gaussian. In the interval
between the moments of arrival of the APD signal, it satisfies Eq. (6.9b). The transi-
tion density entering into this equation for the model with constant and Q has the
form [97]

→ 1 1 → T
w −
α (k)|−
→
α (k − 1) = exp − − α (k) − −
→
α (k − 1)
(2π ) det Q
m 2
→
Q −1 −
α (k) − − →
α (k − 1) (6.10)
We obtain a recurrent algorithm for calculating the evaluation − →

α (k) of the
maximum reclosure. One of the most convenient descriptions that take into account
the local behavior of APD in filtering problems of discrete Markov processes is based
on its multi-Gaussian approximation [100–103]. The possibility of describing prob-
ability densities of a fairly general form using weighted sums of Gaussian densities
(Gaussian splines) is justified in [104, 105].
We will assume that the main peak of the LR (or FLR) can be approximated by
the density of the Gaussian distribution. In this case, as follows from (6.9a)–(6.10)
after detecting the signal, the a posteriori probability density of the presence of a
signal with parameters − →α (k − 1) in the (k − 1)th period can be represented in the
form of the sum of Gaussian densities.

→ → 1 → ∗
T
Wk1 − α (k − 1) = rk − α (k − 1) exp − − α (k − 1) − αˆ (k − 1)
2
∗
X (k − 1)[−
→
α (k − 1) − αˆ (k − 1)

1 → T
+ sk exp − − ˆ − 1)
α (k − 1) − α(k
2

P (k − 1) −
−1 → ˆ − 1)
α (k − 1) − α(k
∗
where αˆ (k) is the coordinate vector of the maximum of the LR (the maximum
likelihood estimate is the ML-estimate); X(k) is the matrix of second derivatives
∗
(Hessian) of the function L(−→α (k)) = ln(− →α (k)) at a point αˆ (k); α(k)—vector
ˆ
of estimates of the coordinates of the maximum of the maximum of APD of the
presence of a signal (APM-estimates); P(k) is the covariance matrix of estimates
of dimension m × m; rk (−→
α (k)), sk —coefficients, the values of which are calculated
further.
After comparing Wk1 (−→α (k − 1)) with the control threshold, the maximum of the
peaks exceeding this threshold is selected. It can be represented as
→
Wk1 −
α (k − 1)

1 1 −
→
T
ˆ − 1) P −1 (k − 1)
= skm exp − α (k − 1) − α(k
(2π )m det P(k − 1) 2

−
→ ˆ − 1) .
α (k − 1) − α(k
→
Substituting Wk1 −
α (k − 1) into (6.9b), we get
→ → 1
Wke1 −
α (k) = νe −
α (k) + skm
(2π ) detPe (k)
m

1 −
→ ˆ
T
−1

−
→ ˆ
× exp − α (k) − α e (k) × Pe (k) α (k) − α e (k) , (6.11)
2
where νe (− →α (k)) = wa (−
→
α (k))(1 − skm ); αˆ e (k)—vector of extrapolated estimates
(coordinates of maximum) Wke (− →
α (k)); Pe (k)—covariance matrix of estimates
ˆα e (k), and
−̂
→α e (k) = −̂
→α (k − 1); (6.12a)
Pe (k) = P(k − 1) T
+ Q(k − 1); (6.12b)
The main OD peak near the exact value in the kth period is approximated by
the density of the Gaussian distribution. Find the parameters of this density. We
decompose L(− →α (k)) in a power series at a point αˆ e (k) and restrict ourselves to
terms of the second order:
→
α (k) = L αˆ e (k) + −
L − → z (k)Y (k) − →
α (k) − αˆ e (k)
T
1 → T
− − α (k) − αˆ e (k) Y T (k)C(k)Y (k) − →
α (k) − αˆ e (k) , (6.13)
2
where Y T (k) is the matrix introduced by the relation (6.4); −

→
z (k) = gradL(−
→
α (k))
is a vector of dimension (m1 + m2 ) with elements
→
∂L −α (k)
z i (k) = ; (6.14a)
∂μi −
→ ˆ e (k)
μ =μ
C(k) is a Hessian of dimension (m 1 + m 2 ) × (m 1 + m 2 ) with elements

→
∂2 L −α (k)
Ci j (k) = (6.14b)
∂μi ∂μ j −
→ ˆ e (k)
μ =μ
Substituting (6.13) and (6.14a, 6.14b) into (6.11), we obtain, after a series of
transformations:

−
→ −
→ 1 −
→ ˆ ∗
T
−→ ˆ ∗
Wke1 α (k) = rk α (k) exp − α (k) − α (k) X (k) α (k) − α (k)
2
T
1 − → ˆ −1 −
→ ˆ
+ sk exp − α (k) − α(k) · P (k) α (k) − α(k) , (6.15)
2
where
X (k) = Y T (k)C(k)Y (k); (6.16a)
∗
αˆ (k) = αˆ e (k) + X −1 (k)Y T (k)−
→
z (k); (6.16b)
P −1 (k) = Pe−1 (k) + Y T (k)C(k)Y (k); (6.16c)
ˆ
α(k) = αˆ e (k) + P(k)Y T (k)−
→
z (k); (6.16d)
− − 1
→ → ˆ
rk α (k) = νe α (k) C(k)L α e (k) exp −
→ T −1 −
→
z (k)Y (k)X (k) × Y (k) z (k) ;
T
2
(6.16e)

sk = s(k−1)m C(k)L αˆ e (k)

1 1−→ T −
→
exp z (k)Y (k) × P(k) × Y T
(k) z (k) ; (6.16f)
(2π )m detPe (k) 2
Thus, the recurrent algorithm for calculating the aposterior probability, the values
of the APD α(k)ˆ and estimates and the covariance matrix P(k) of these estimates
are expressed by Formulas (6.11–6.16a to 6.16g).
The operation of the signal processing device (Fig. 6.6) according to this algorithm
begins with the calculation of the likelihood ratio N , which is used in all blocks
of the circuit. The device implements the search and search detection algorithm,
as well as the control detection algorithm, which carry out the analysis of APD
and compare it with the thresholds, respectively, in the detection mode and in the
tracking mode. Decisions γ0 on the detection of the signal and γ on the continuation
of measurements are used for switching in the circuit of the processing device,
conventionally designated Sw.1 ÷ Sw.4. Using Sw.1 the initial estimate αˆl of the
n coordinates of the maximum of the main APD peak is transferred to the linear
smoothing and extrapolation filter (SEF), which implements the calculation of the
ˆ
estimates αˆ e (k) and α(k) according to Formulas (6.12a) and (6.16d).
−
→
The signal z (k) from the output of the optimal nonlinear discriminator, which
calculates the value of the gradient ln N at a point μ ˆ e (k), is fed to the input of the
SEF. The vector − →z (k) at this point can be considered as the sum of the useful error
signal −→
ε (k), proportional to the difference between the extrapolated αˆ e (k) and the
true α E value of the parameter vector −
−
→ →α and the random error. The vector μ ˆ e (k) is
also used in the block of weight coefficients (BWC) to calculate the matrix X (k),
which characterizes the width of the main peak N . Using the matrix X (k) in this
block, the covariance matrices P(k) and Pe (k) of the estimates α(k) ˆ and αˆ e (k) are
calculated. The matrix P(k) is fed through Sw. 2 to the SEF if there is a solution γ M .
Fig. 6.6 Block diagram of the estimation algorithm with the optimal discriminator
As an output estimate αˆ out (k), a smoothed estimate α(k)

ˆ is used, which is transmitted
to the output of the device via Sw. 3 in the presence of a solution γ M . If necessary,
you can implement the memory mode by issuing αˆ out (k) as an extrapolated estimate
αˆ e (k) through Sw. 3, controlled by the delayed by time T solution γ M . The part of
the circuit that implements the memory mode is indicated in Fig. 6.6 by dashed line.
When implementing processing devices, it is often more convenient to use an
optimal nonlinear discriminator that generates an error signal − →
ε (k), but an optimal
primary meter (PM) (or otherwise, an estimator unit [99]) that directly implements
the ML parameter α(k)ˆ estimation in each observation period. The variant with PM
(optimal non-tracking meter [99]) is depicted in Fig. 6.7. Under the conditions when
the approximations are fair to Gaussian distributions, these devices are equivalent.
∗
Indeed, it follows from Formula (6.16b) that Y T − →z = X (αˆ − αˆ e ). Substituting this
expression into (6.16d), we get
∗
ˆ
α(k) = αˆ e (k) + P(k)X (k) αˆ (k) − αˆ e (k) . (6.16g)
The advantage of the device processing with PM is the weakening of the require-
ments for the width of the a priori distribution of measurement errors during capture
(the transition from search to tracking). For the discriminator, this width should be
less than the linear portion of the selection zone (discrimination), for the PM it is
somewhat wider than the peak of the likelihood ratio. The capture zone in the last
version seems to be expanded. The disadvantage of PM in comparison with the
discriminator in some cases is the greater complexity of implementation.
Fig. 6.7 Block diagram of the estimation algorithm with an optimal primary meter
The considered signal processing device will be referred to below in accordance

with the existing terminology [99] as a search and tracking meter (STM).
6.2.4 Connection of the STM Functional Structure

with the Theory of Quasilinear Filtering
The essential difference between the considered STM structure and the numerous
nonlinear filtering algorithms known from the literature is the organic connection
of filtering with search and detection of signals with varying parameters. With the
presence of a signal and the choice of using the detector to filter the main peak
of the APD circuit, containing the optimal discriminator (or the optimal PM), the
SEF and BWC implement a quasi-optimal nonlinear filter algorithm (quasilinear
filter) [67], which is optimal by the APD criterion in Gaussian approximation. The
conditions of applicability of the Gaussian approximation of APD in most of the
works are associated with the behavior of the logarithm L of the FLR, since, for a
linear function L, the posterior density is Gaussian. Consider this condition for the
case of a scalar parameter [67].
The general view of the conditionally optimal recursive quasilinear filtering algo-
rithm, obtained by expanding the automatic reclosing logarithm in a series in powers

of [(k)−0 (k)] and limiting by linear approximation, is described by the expression

(k) = 0 (k) − σ 2 (k) g1 (k) − L 0 (k) ,
−1

where σ 2 (k) = g2 (k) − L 0 (k) a posteriori variance at the kth step of the

algorithm; 0 (k)—preliminary estimate at the kth step;
di
gi (k) = lnWke1 ((k)) ,
d(k) j (k)=0 (k)
j = 1, 2—the coefficients of the decomposition of the logarithm of the main peak of

an extrapolated APD in the presence of a signal in a series of powers (k) − 0 (k) .
The considered structure of the meter with the optimal discriminator corresponds

to the choice as 0 (k) of an extrapolated estimate e (k) corresponding to the

maximum. The structure of the meter with optimal PI corresponds to the choice

∗
of 0 (k) ML-estimation (k) as. With the validity of the Gaussian approximation
of the main APD peak and, accordingly, the optimality of quasilinear algorithms,
these preliminary estimates lead to algorithms equivalent in terms of accuracy. The
advantages of the variant with PM have already been noted in clause 6.2.3.
Other possible algorithms based on local Gaussian approximation are described,
in particular, in [67, 106]. In [106], it is indicated that it is difficult to make a general
discussion about the usefulness

of using additional terms in decomposing the APD

in a series of powers of (k) − 0 (k) .

In [67], it was shown that for the validity of the Gaussian approximation of the
APD and, therefore, the optimality of quasilinear algorithms, and it suffices to satisfy
the condition of a small apostrial dispersion

σ 2 (k) l(k) (6.17)
and conditions of relatively high quality preassessment

a (k) − 0 (k) l(k), (6.18)
where

S 0 (k), k
l(k) ≈
; l(k) = min{l1 (k), l2 (k)};
S 0 (k), k
1
1 0 (k) j−2
g2 (k) j−2 l
l1 (k) ≈ ; l2 (k) ≈ ; j ≥3
g j (k)

l (i) 0 (k)
Condition (6.18) shows that the posterior mean square deviation should be signif-
icantly less than the ratios of the coefficients of the expansions of the main peaks
of the extrapolated APD and LR with the numbers j0 > 2, and j0 determines the
order of the quasilinear filter. Qualitatively, this means that the more the shape of the
main peaks of the extrapolated APD and LR differs from the Gaussian one, the more
rigorous the optimality condition of the quasilinear algorithm becomes. If we assume
that the transition probability density w((k)|(k − 1)) is Gaussian (namely this
case corresponds to the models of changing navigation parameters), then, as follows
from (6.9a), ultimately distortion of the shape of the main peak of extrapolated APD
is caused by LR distortions (FLR).
In further studies [62], it was noted that besides the conditions of high a posteriori
accuracy for the validity of the Gaussian approximation, it is necessary to have one LR
extremum (FLR), or, in terms related to the concept of discriminatory characteristics,
one point of stable equilibrium that is provided both by the used signal and by
smoothing (in time and/or ensemble of realizations) of the function L () in the
vicinity of the true value of the parameter . In this case, an inequality σ 2 (k) ≤
εl (k)/4 is taken as a necessary condition, which corresponds to the probability of an

error in the estimation ε(k) = E (k) − (k) on average, on a linear section of the
discrimination characteristic equal to 0.954. Usually, they take the εl interval between
the nearest points where the discriminatory characteristic reaches a maximum.
In order to eliminate the polymodality caused by the form of the signal used,
the following methods have been developed, in particular, within the framework of
algorithms with discriminators:
the use of information redundancy due to the integrated signal processing of
several meters [107];
the use of multichannel circuits, when each channel “monitors” the position of
one of the many points of the discriminator’s stable equilibrium [62]. This method
leads, however, to complex algorithms that impede its practical implementation;
the transition from the “local” Gaussian approximation considered above to the
integral approximation of the APD [106] with the help of a chosen distribution in
the entire range of possible values of the estimated parameter. Selection of a model
distribution for a specific problem is usually based on physical considerations;
the method of introducing an additional variable, which in the problem of esti-
mating a random time delay of a coherent signal, reduces the approximation
of polymodal APD to the problem of an ordinary Gaussian approximation in
an expanded space of variables by artificial separation of envelope delays and
high-frequency oscillations [106].

The above reasoning corresponds to the choice of the decomposition 0 (k) point

of the logarithm of the APD into a series of extrapolated estimates e (k) corre-
sponding to the maximum Wke1 ((k)). The structure of the meter with the optimal

∗
PM corresponds to the choice as 0 (k) the most plausible estimate (k). In the
framework of the validity of the Gaussian approximation, these preliminary estimates
lead to equivalent in the sense of accuracy algorithms. However, if the unimodality
of the automatic reclosing system is violated due to the specifics of the signal model,
the difference between the discriminator and the PM becomes significant.
The discriminator is an integral part of a closed contour for the development
of an assessment and cannot be changed without changing the entire estimation
algorithm, which, as follows from the above works, leads in most cases to difficult-
to-implement schemes. At the same time, the PM included at the input of the meter
can be changed so that, without loss of accuracy, to ensure the uniqueness of the
maximum likelihood estimate, which will further guarantee the validity of the local
Gaussian approximation and the use of one is sufficient simple outline smoothing
estimates. Such a change in the PM leads to combined algorithms, the utility of which
is indicated, for example, in [108]. In this case, different variants of the combined
algorithms will differ in what PM will be used.
From the theory of estimating the constant parameters of signals [30], it follows
that when harmonizing the structure of a meter that produces ML, with input signal
models, quasi-deterministic interference and Gaussian noise, as well as with a large
signal-to-noise ratio, parabola, symmetric with respect to the true value of the param-
eter, which ensures unbiased estimation. When the structure of the meter and the
signal model are mismatched, there is either interference or both, and with a large
signal-to-noise ratio, there is asymmetry and a shift in the maximum of the main
peak of the LR (FLR), and, therefore, the ML-estimate. When reducing the signal-
to-noise ratio, there are side peaks of LR (FLR), leading to abnormal errors. In all
these cases, conditions (6.17, 6.18) are violated and quasilinear algorithms become
nonoptimal. At the same time, the synthesis of optimal nonlinear algorithms, taking
into account, for example, the possibility of the appearance of side LR peaks and,
therefore, APD, leads to practically unrealizable results [96].
In the works of V.N. Kharisov, generalized in [106], another method of transition
to quasi-optimal algorithms was proposed, based on integral approximation of APD,
which consists in replacing Wk (− →α ) with a certain density of a known form from the
parameterized class P( α , a ), while the number −
−
→ −
→ →a is convenient to choose a small
one. For example, the approximating density can be chosen in the class of Gaussian
probability densities N (− →a ,−→m , R) with expectation and the correlation matrix R.
By using some proximity criterion P(− →α ,−→a ) to Wk (−
→
α ) for example, the Kullback
criterion, replacing the automatic reclosing in the Stratonovich equation with the
function P(− α ,−
→ →
a ). As a result, equations are obtained for the components, which
are new equations of quasi-optimal filtration.
A number of examples show that algorithms with an integral approximation
offer an advantage over the local Gaussian approximation in the filter transition
process and a slight advantage in accuracy in the stationary filtering mode and large
signal-to-noise ratios. However, advantages are achieved by increased complexity,
since even after replacing an analytical solution is often not found, and one has to
resort to approximate methods using Taylor expansion, which is true, as with local
approximation, in the case of high filtration accuracy [106].
Thus, to preserve the optimality of quasilinear algorithms, which are much simpler
to implement than general nonlinear ones, the relatively high quality of PM estimates
and, therefore, its resistance to changes in signal and interference models is decisive.
This is especially important for systems VOR, RSBN, MCD, MLS, in which there is
a priori uncertainty of the composition and characteristics of the actual interference.
Therefore, of great importance is the study of PM algorithms, optimal and subop-
timal under the action of single noise and noise, a comparison of their effectiveness,
as well as the choice of PM algorithms under the action of interference. A similar
situation is typical for search and detection algorithms that are part of the functional
structure of STM. On the one hand, their implementation on the basis of calculating
the automatic reclosing and finding its maximum is very difficult. On the other hand,
this procedure is not sufficiently resistant to changing signal and interference models.
Therefore, in the literature, a large number of search and detection algorithms, subop-
timal and heuristic, are considered that provide one way or another to simplify the
implementation and increase the stability of characteristics.
From the functional structure of STM, it follows that the search and detection are
of an auxiliary nature, ensuring the selection of the main APD peak. In this case, the
characteristics of the output αˆ out (k) STM estimates depend both on the characteristics
∗
of the estimates αˆ (k) and on the influence of the search and detection algorithms
on the nonlinear filter.
For large dimensions − →α , the structure considered above is complex. For each
parameter, it contains two closed contours (channels for estimating and error
matrixes), as well as general matrix smoothing circuits. Therefore, you should point
out the existing ways to simplify the structure. One of them is the use of its mean X
instead of the matrix X over the conditional distribution of observations (likelihood
function). The conditions for such a replacement (conditions of small interference)
→
[67] suggest the smallness of the mean deviation of the fluctuation parts L − α (k) ,
or the matrix X as compared with their regular parts. The use of X makes it possible
to eliminate the second circuit in the evaluation chain of each parameter and reduce
the filter to the combination of a nonlinear discriminator (or PM) and smoothing
circuits with variable parameters. This is because the matrix X can be computed
in step k − 1 before the observation of the random variable x(k).
The second possibility is to lower the order of the matrix X and, ultimately, the
entire filter by eliminating non-formative parameters. If non-informative parameters
are considered random and their a priori distributions are known, then when calcu-
lating the ML-estimate, the LR (or FLR) can be averaged over these parameters [108].
If nothing is known about them, then to reduce the dimension of the filter, you should
use the method of partial maximization of LR (FLR) by these parameters [30]. Since
the vector − →α is considered to be constant when calculating ML-estimates, most
often after a decrease in the order, asymptotically effective estimates of informative
parameters are obtained. There may be more complex cases (e.g., uncertainty in the
effect of interference), for which the dimension of the problem can also be reduced
in the framework of the theory of estimating constant parameters with practical
preservation of the accuracy of the ML-estimates.
The gain obtained during the transition from the ML-estimation of a constant
informative parameter in the current period of the repetition of the input process
(t) to the optimal evaluation of the process (t) is different for different models of
this process and their parameters. The possibility of this gain is due to the redundancy
of the information contained in the process (t). If the repetition period of the pulse
signals is such that the values at different periods are practically not correlated, then
the redundancy is eliminated. In this case, the transition to the evaluation process,
i.e., implementation of the recurrent filter, the gain in accuracy does not.
6.2.5 Features of the Implementation of the Functional

Structure of STM
−
→
The observation model (6.3), containing the function S t, k (t), −
→
κk (t) , describing
−
→
an almost arbitrary, generally nonlinear, transformation over the vectors k (t) and
−
→
κ (t), is sufficiently universal for describing various jamming situations, in partic-
k
ular, the occurrence and disappearance of useful signals, the temporal effect of
multipath propagation (passive interference), which is most typical for RSBN and
MLS.
During normal system operation, the S function describes the signal from the
beacon. Under the action of passive interference, the function S is equal to the sum of
the useful and reflected signals. Under the action of a quasi-harmonic multiplicative
interference, it is equal to the modulated signal, depending on the parameters of the
signal and interference. Under the action of impulse noise in RSBN with a pulse filling
of the azimuth signal with function S, the sum of the signal and the quasi-determined
sequence of interfering pulses can be described.
Thus, the functional structure of STM, obtained on the basis of this model, allows
to theoretically solve the problem of processing the beacon signals against the back-
ground of the main interference operating in these systems. The nature of the inter-
action of the signal and interference determines the form of the function S and,
therefore, affects the structure of the PM or the discriminator. In the synthesis of
algorithms for processing angular signals, preference is usually given to primary
gages, and in the case of ranging signals, discriminators. Synthesis of primary meters,
forming ML-estimates of parameters of angular signals under the action of noise,
passive interference, multiplicative and impulse interference, as well as processing
of ranging signals in radio navigation systems are considered in [32].
As follows from the obtained STM structure (and it was already noted in [95]), the
processing of periodic pulsed incoherent signals involves two types of operations—
intraperiodic (in PM or discriminator and precision block—the X matrix calculator)
and interperiod (in the remaining blocks meter). Interperiod operations are discrete;
intraperiod operations are not limited to this structure and can be both continuous
and discrete. In the future, both of these cases will be considered, since part of the
operations in real STM can be performed only by analog circuits and some by digital
ones.
Let us consider in more detail the features of building STM with signal processing,
focused on the use of microprocessor technology. The structure of such a device is
largely determined by the relationship between the time parameters of the input
−
→
signal, the process (t), the process of data output in the FNC, and the speed of the
digital STM. For simplicity, we will further consider the parameter to be scalar.
Let be τ the duration of the input signal; T —the period of the signal repetition;
T is the average interval of change of the parameter (t), at which the neglect of
this change leads to the measurement error iz back ≥ pr ; T out —the period
of issue of measured values in the FNC; ec is a parameter characterizing the effective
STM performance. The following possible cases can be distinguished.
1. The case τ T ; T ∼ εT where ε is an integer of the order of 10–20, is
characteristic for the distance measuring channels of landing system, MCD and
the channel of the reference signals RSBN. In the FNC, a high frequency of
data acquisition from the sensors is usually not required; therefore, it can be
considered Tout ∼ T . Since the duration of the mentioned signals is commen-
surate with the speed of modern airborne computing devices (τ ∼ ec ), it is
advisable to carry out the processing of individual pulses (discrimination) by
analog–digital means, processing within the period T (search and detection)—
by fast-acting digital means. Filtering information is divided into two stages.
At the first stage, the data is grouped at intervals of the order of T (“frequent”
filtering with a period of T ) with a rather simple digital filter. At the second stage,
a “slower” optimal recurrent filtering and data output with a period of Tout [95]
are performed. This is the idea of the method of dual-frequency filtering [24]
(otherwise—integral data input [97], grouping observations [109–111], “algo-
rithms with information accumulation” [62]). Algorithms of “frequent” filtering
can implement signal processing processes, and “slow” recurrent filtering can
be done by data processors.
Apparently, [112] was one of the first works on dual-frequency filtering. In [113],
it was proposed at the “frequent” filtering stage to generate a residual signal at the
output of the discriminator as the arithmetic mean of the residuals calculated for
each observation received at the input of the discriminator. In the book [24], the
physical essence of the two-particle filtering method is considered. In a discrete
measurement model with independent errors, it would be possible to calculate the
estimates using the formulas of optimal (or quasi-optimal) algorithms, but with a
frequency that is N times lower than the arrival frequency of input observations.
“However, calculations using the same formulas with low-frequency mean using
not all, but only some of the primary measurements. As a result, the estimation
accuracy can be significantly worse than the accuracy achieved in calculations with
large frequency (a decrease of N times the measurement frequency in a discrete
measurement model with independent errors increases N times all the elements of
the measurement error matrix). If the measurement error vectors are statistically
dependent, then a decrease in the reasonable frequency of using the measurement
results will cause a relatively slight deterioration in the accuracy of the estimate.
But the mentioned vectors will become dependent if the primary digital information
passes through a digital filter … The algorithm must be as simple as possible and
have a “memory”: a sequence of independent random vectors fed to its input must
turn into a sequence of statistically dependent random vectors with a sufficiently
strong correlation ”[24]. Further studies were devoted to the selection or synthesis
of such filters.
−
→
In [24], for the linear model of measurements − y ki = H −
→ →x ki + ξ ki , the algorithm
−
→ −
→
− −
of the “frequent” filter is selected in the form y ki = α y k,i−1 + β − →y ki , where α, β
are some non-singular matrices, such that α + β = I . The conditions are given under
which the correlation matrix of errors of the optimal recurrent filter (Kalman filter)
standing at the time of the “frequent” filter is almost equal to the correlation matrix of
errors of the same Kalman filter, to the input of which data with the same frequency
as the entrance to the “frequent” filter.
In [114, 115], the synthesis of filters is considered for the model of the state of the
form x(k) = x(k − 1) (the so-called quasi-random sequence) and the linear burst
observation model, in which information is transmitted as a periodic sequence—the
intensity of the pulse trains. For a given structure of a linear “frequent” filter, an
algorithm for an optimal linear recurrent “slow” filter is obtained. Another variant of
the same problem is the loading of a slow filter with a weight coefficient K constant
within a pack, calculated in the interval between the packs. For such a problem,
in [116, 117], under the assumption that the state of the object inside the pack is
unchanged, a formula is obtained for the optimal coefficient K using the parameters
of the “slow” Kalman filter.
Later in [111], the method of grouping observations was considered, which is
based on replacing the estimated process at an unlimited time interval by another,
also quasi-random process, which coincides at one of the points of each neighboring
sampling interval with the original process. For the new quasi-random process, the
problem of estimating according to the criterion of the maximum reclosing is solved.
Filtering errors and approximation errors are investigated.
The following tasks are considered in [97]:
1. linear discrete time filtering of integral observations obtained by summing the
input observations in a moving window. For a linear equation of state with a
constant transition matrix, the optimal algorithm of the “slow” recurrent filter
is obtained, which differs little from the Kalman filter, since its coefficients are
also calculated before running the algorithm;
2. recurrent filtering with weighted integral data input. As a “frequent” filter, a
tracking meter is used—a linear recurrent filter with given constant parameters
(Wiener filter), built for linear models of state and observation. Further, for the
output data of the tracking filter, a Kalman filter is constructed, the coefficients
of which are determined both by the parameters of the state and observation
models and the parameters of the tracking filter.
In [118], a combined algorithm was obtained, consisting of a Wiener filter and
a Kalman filter for a linear observation model (an extended Kalman filter for a
nonlinear observation model). The obtained equations have a close connection with
the methods of grouping (“compressing”) data, since the optimal characteristic of
the “frequent” filter, which is the Wiener filter, is obtained. The results of this work
give simpler algorithms than the results close to them [109, 110].
An exact analytical solution of the optimal estimation problem without separation
of the Wiener and Kalman filter for linear models of state and observation was
obtained in [62]. The result of calculating the coefficient in the ratio connecting the
optimal estimates of the state vector through N steps with the parameters of the state
and observation models is not given in the book due to its cumbersomeness, but
it is noted that the practical implementation of the algorithm will require the same
multiplications as required by the Kalman filter algorithm. Therefore, in practical
implementation, as indicated in [62], it is better to use the simplifications given, for
example, in [97].
Thus, the main results obtained for the two-frequency filtering method give a
particular structure of “frequent” linear filters that work well with conventional
models of linear observations. However, for distance measuring channels of radio
beacon systems, the disappearance of response ranging signals and the action of pulse
interference are typical. The latter leads to abnormally large emissions in the obser-
vation model. Thus, the development of two-frequency filtering algorithms that are
robust (robust) to changes in the observation model is relevant. Some of the results
obtained to RSBN avionics are given in [119].
2. The case τ T ; T ∼ T ; ec τ —typical for ILS, VOR, azimuth channel
RSBN, PRMG and angular channels MLS. The period of receipt of data in the
FNC will also be considered equal to T ∼ T .
As shown in [32], one of the most common in radio beacon systems is passive
interference (reflections from local objects), which in many cases repeats the useful
signal in shape. The task of synthesizing quasi-optimal algorithms for estimating
signal parameters under the action of a signal-like interference was solved even in
the book [120]. It is noted that even if we consider the signal parameters and inter-
ference as a priori independent diffusion processes with known coefficients of drift
and diffusion, then a posteriori these processes are statistically dependent. Therefore,
the synthesis of quasi-optimal algorithms for processing the useful signal, based on
the solution of the Stratonovich equation by approximate methods, also includes
the processing of the interfering signal. The quasi-optimal device for receiving
and processing observations includes schemes for filtering the parameters of the
interfering signal, generating an estimated value of this signal and compensating
(subtracting from the observed process) the estimated value of the disturbance. Such
schemes are called compensation schemes [see also 62,120].
However, as shown by modeling in [62], the presence in the observation of an
interfering signal can lead to qualitative changes in the automatic reclosing of the
processes assessed. These changes are associated with the transformation of the
signal function (discrimination characteristic), which depends on the energy char-
acteristics and the implementation of the parameters of additional signals. The most
important property of this transformation is that the unimodal APD becomes poly-
modal, and its global maximum can be reached not at the point of the true values
of the estimated parameters. “The latter circumstance may require a change in the
optimization criterion associated with the specific choice of the loss function and
taking into account the specified features of the a posteriori polymodal distribution”
[62, p. 416].
Thus, the obtained results of the synthesis of a quasi-optimal estimation algorithm
in the presence of a signal-like interference suggest that you should look for ways to
eliminate this polymodality. This goal can be, for example, achieved in the course of
synthesis of primary meters, optimal under the action of passive interference [32].
Under the action of other interference peculiar to the systems under consideration,
optimal or suboptimal PM algorithms are also synthesized. Then a comparative study
of the efficiency of the algorithms is carried out, and the most acceptable of them are
selected in terms of precise requirements and implementation possibilities.
Optimal algorithms of primary meters (processing of single goniometer signals)
can be formed for continuous time based on the criterion of maximum FLR and
then used their discrete counterparts. In the interval Tp for the formation of the
primary estimate, the signals are sampled depending on the ratio between τ and ec
and the complexity of the calculations in each sampling interval. Thus, the essen-
tially nonlinear nature of the processing task is taken into account at the first stage of
estimation. After reducing the region of uncertainty for the parameter being evalu-
ated, the recurrent algorithm of quasilinear (or linear Kalman) filtering with a period
Tout ∼ T ∼ T is used. Such a solution to the problem is characteristic of two-stage
combined estimation algorithms [108].
If one or several interferences, other than the model for which the processing
device is synthesized, act, then additional measurement errors will arise. Therefore,
the weak sensitivity (robustness) of the PM (or discriminator), as well as the matrix
X calculation unit to the change in the observation model, is desirable. If conditions
(6.17) and (6.18) are fulfilled at the same time, then the Gaussian approximation of
the APD will be ensured, and, therefore, the optimality of the quasilinear filtering
algorithm will be optimal. The most promising method for obtaining stable estimation
algorithms with uncertainty about operating noise is to apply a theory based on the
use of statistical principles of robustness and invariance [28, 32].
Section 6.2.8 considers algorithms for robust estimation of signal parameters
based on solving regression problems.
6.2.6 Quasilinear APM-Estimation Algorithm

with Nonlinear Dependence of Informative Signal
Parameters on Navigation Parameters
Above, when deriving algorithms for optimal processing of signals from radio navi-
gation systems, it was assumed that the vector of informative parameters of each
−
→
of the signals (t) is associated with the vector of navigation parameters − →
ρ (t)
−
→ −
→
by linear dependence (t) = H ρ (t). In this case, multichannel linear filtering
of measurement results is possible in integrated avionics, discussed in Sect. 6.5.1
below.
In practice, in most cases, the DSP measurement equations contain a nonlinear
−
→
relationship between the information parameters (t) of signals and the navigation
parameters of a particular RNS in the coordinate system of this RNS. In addition,
there may be a nonlinear relationship between the navigation parameters of the RNS
and the navigation parameters in the coordinate system used in CPI [97, 108]. For
example, measurements in RSBN are carried out in the time domain, then recalculated
using linear transformations into polar coordinates (azimuth, distance) associated
with the RSBN radio beacon, and joint filtering of DSP and INS data is performed,
for example, in geodetic coordinates WGS-84.
Let us consider how the quasilinear gage algorithm changes if the vector of infor-
−
→
mative parameters (t) of the signal processed by the meter is associated with the
−
→
vector of navigation parameters − →ρ (t) by a nonlinear dependence (t) = h[− →
ρ (t)].
This vector will be considered common to all RNS, with which integrated avionics is
working at this stage of the flight. Thus, we assume that in each DSP, the parameters
are transformed into a coordinate system in which CPI is manufactured. The esti-
mation problem for nonlinear dependence in the observation equation is considered,
for example, in [68, 121].
We assume that the change in parameters −→ρ (t) is described by the equation of
state
−
→ −
→
ρ (t) = (k, k − 1)−
→
ρ (k − 1) + (k − 1) ζ (k − 1), (6.19)
and the observation equation is
−
→ −̂
→ ∗ → −
y (k) = (k) = h −
ρ (k) + →
v (k), (6.20)
Given the Gaussian approximation of the APD presence of a signal for the
Eq. (6.19), the recurrent algorithm of the quasilinear filtering of the vector −
→
ρ (t)
can be written as equations:
ˆ
ρ(k) = ρˆ e (k) + P(k)F (k), (6.21)
−̂
→ρ e (k) = (k, k − 1)−̂
→ρ (k − 1), (6.22)
P −1 (k) = Pe−1 (k) − F (k), (6.23)
Pe (k) = (k, k − 1)P(k − 1) T

(k, k − 1) + (k − 1)Q(k − 1) T (k − 1),
(6.24)
where P(k) is the covariance matrix of the APM vector estimate − →

ρ (t); Pe (k) is the
−
→
covariance matrix of the extrapolated vector estimate ρ (t); F (k) is the vector of
partial derivatives of the first order of the of log FLR of the components of the vector
−
→ρ (t) at a point −̂
→α e (k); F (k) is the matrix of partial second-order partial derivatives
of the log of FLR with respect to the components of the vector − →ρ (t) at a point αˆ e (k).
The ultimate goal of signal processing in a DSP is to obtain estimates of navi-
gation parameters − →ρ (t) from estimates of informative parameters. To transform the
quasilinear filtering algorithm − →ρ (t), we represent the partial derivatives of the log
FLR in the following form:
→ →
∂ L(−
→ ∂L − ∂L −
m1 m1
α) α ∂ j α ∂h j
= = (i = 1, . . . , m 3 )
∂ρi j=1
∂ j ∂ρi j=1
∂ j ∂ρi
or, in the vector matrix form with the transition to discrete time, at the point αˆ e (k)
we get
−
→
F (k) = H T (k) l (k),
−
→
where H (k) is the matrix with elements ∂h∂ρ i[ ρ ]
|−
→ ; h i are components of the
j ρ =ρˆ e (k)
−→
vector function h[−
→ρ (k)]; l(k)—the vector of partial derivatives of the first order of
−
→
the log of the FLR for the components of the vector (t) at a point αˆ e (k), consisting
of the components
∂ L(−
→
α)
l j (k) = (6.25)
∂ j −
→
α =αˆ e (k)
We use the approximation
∂ L(−
→
m1
α) ∗
h μ ρˆ e (k) − μ (k) c jμ (k),

l j (k) = =− (6.26)
∂ j −
→
α =αˆ e (k) μ=1

∗
where μ (k) is the maximum likelihood estimate of the μth component of the vector
−
→
(t); −
→
h μ ρˆ e (k) —value of the μth component of the function (k) = h[−
→ρ (k)] at a
−̂
→
point ρ (k); c (k)—the partial derivatives of the second order of the log of the
jμ
Y
−
→ →∗
−

FLR with respect to the components of the vector (t) at a point (k), forming
the matrix C(k).
Substituting (6.26) into (6.25), we obtain
∗
−
→ −
→

l (k) = C(k) (k) − h ρˆ e (k) .
From here we get the filtration equation

∗
ˆρ(k) = ρˆ e (k) + P(k)H T (k)C(k) −
→

ˆ
(k) − h ρ e (k)
∗
−
→

ˆ ˆ
= ρ e (k) + K (k) (k) − h ρ e (k) , (6.27)
where K (k) = P(k)H T (k)C(k) is the filter transmission coefficient.

Similarly, we get
→ → 2
∂ 2 L(−
→ ∂2 L − ∂L −
m1 m1 m1
α) α ∂ j ∂μ α ∂ j
= + . (6.28)
∂ρi ∂ρl j=1 μ=1
∂ j ∂μ ∂ρi ∂ρl j=1
∂ j ∂ρi ∂ρl
Substituting (6.26) into (6.28) and assuming that

∂ 2 L(−
→
α) ∂ 2 L(− →
α)
−
→

≈ ∗ ,
→ −→

∂ j ∂μ −
→
= e (k) ∂ j ∂ μ −
= (k)
we get
∗
∂ 2 L(−
→
m1 m1
α) ∂ 2 j −
→

≈ c jμ (k) + μ (k) − h μ ρˆ e (k)

∂ j ∂μ −
→
α =αˆ e (k) j=1 μ=1
∂ρi ∂ρl
⎫
∂h j ρˆ e (k) ∂h μ ρˆ e (k) ⎬
− . (6.29)
∂ρi ∂ρl ⎭
−
→
Considering that
for
∗
each
component
of the vector h[ ρ (k)] in the filtering process,
the difference h μ ρˆ (k) − h μ ρˆ e (k) is close to zero (or averaging expression
−
→
(6.29) over the differences of the two estimates —extra-polished and maximum
likelihood), we obtain that, in matrix form,
F (k) = −H T (k)C(k)H (k). (6.30)
Therefore, the equation for the covariance matrix of the APM vector estimate −
→
ρ
can be written as
P −1 (k) = Pe−1 + H T (k)C(k)H (k) (6.31)
Equations (6.27) and (6.31) determine the quasilinear filtering algorithm, in which,
unlike algorithm (6.16a–6.16g), the matrix H (k) appears, which depends nonlinearly
on the navigation parameters −
→ ρ (k). The matrix C, taken with the opposite sign, is a
Fisher information matrix, which determines the accuracy of the ML-estimates.
6.2.7 Minimax Recurrent Linear Estimation Algorithm
Consider one of the solutions to the problem of minimax recurrent estimation with
linear equations of state and observation [61]:
−
→ −
→
ρ (k + 1) = (k + 1, k)−
→
ρ (k) + ζ (k + 1) (6.32)
∗
−
→

−
→
y (k) = (k) = H (k)−
→
ρ (k) + −
→
v (k), (6.33)
Observations are made on a finite interval [1, n].

The square and rectangular H matrices are assumed to be known, and the noise
−
→
ζ (k), −
→v (k) is unknown. The initial state of the object −
→
ρ (1) is also unknown. Thus,
a priori uncertainty about the object and conditions of observation is contained in
−
→n+1 −
the set g = (− → ,→
n
n ρ (1), ζ 2 v ). It is assumed that
1
$ →T
ρ (1)M1−1 −
gn ∈ G n = g : − →
ρ (1)
n
−
→
+ v T (k)M2−1 −
→
v (k)
k=1
−
→ −
→
+ ζ T (k + 1)M3−1 ζ (k + 1) ≤ rn (6.34)
where M1 , M2 , M3 are non-negative weight matrices, and rn is a given constant.

The set G n is called the uncertainty set of the estimation problem. Some of the
matrices Mi , i = 1, 2, 3, can be reborn or even be zero. In this case, it is assumed
that the corresponding variables belong to the range of values of these matrices, so
−
→
the expressions in (6.34) make sense. For example, if M3 = 0, then ζ = 0, that is,
the noise of the state of the object in this case is zero.
According to the observation data, it is required to find a linear estimate at the
moment of n + 1 state of the object. The evaluation should be the best in the sense
of minimizing the functional
Jn = sup −
→ 2
ˆ + 1)
ρ (n + 1) − ρ(n (6.35)
gn ∈G n
In [61], it was proved that if the matrices M 1 , M 2 , which characterize the set of
uncertainties Gn , are positive, then the best linear estimate of the state of the system
in terms of criterion (6.35) according to observations (6.33) satisfies the equation
ˆ + 1) =
ρ(k ˆ
(k + 1, k)ρ(k) + K (k)[−
→ ˆ
y (k) − H (k)ρ(k)], (6.36)
where
K (k) = (k + 1, k)P(k)H T (k)[M2 + H (k)P(k)H T (k)]−1 , (6.37)
P(k + 1) = (k + 1, k)P(k) T
(k + 1, k) + M3 − (k + 1, k)P(k)H T (k)K T (k),
(6.38)
ˆ
ρ(1) = 0, P(1) = M1 .
where
sup |−
→ ˆ + 1)|2 = rn λ P(n+1) ,
ρ (n + 1) − ρ(n (6.39)
gn ∈G n
where λ P(n+1) —the largest eigenvalue of the matrix P(n + 1).

The relations (6.36–6.38) coincide in structure with the equations of the Kalman
filter and the linear part of the quasilinear algorithm of the MAV-estimation. However,
the matrix P(k) here is not, in the general case, a covariance matrix of estimation
−
→
error, since noise ζ and − →v may not have a probabilistic interpretation. In this case,
P(k) characterizes the estimation error in the minimax sense.
6.2.8 Robust Estimation of the Parameters of Radio

Navigation Signals
6.2.8.1 Task Setting
The design of robust algorithms for estimating parameters of radio navigation signals
is based on the theory of robust estimation of distribution parameters. To solve the
mathematical problem of synthesizing a robust algorithm, it is necessary to analyti-
cally specify the class of permissible characteristics (for example, the class of prob-
ability distributions of interference) and measure the effectiveness of the estimation
procedure for this class. One of the most widely used measures is the worst case
efficiency in the class of input conditions. This approach leads to minimax robust
estimation algorithms [36, 40]. With such a combination of minimax and robust
properties, it is implicitly assumed that the effectiveness of the minimax procedure
for the worst case is quite high, and it will deteriorate less when deviating from any
initial model than the efficiency of the estimate optimal for this model.
Below, we consider a method for constructing minimax robust algorithms for esti-
mating constant parameters of signals (primary meters), based on solving regression
problems [32, 122]. The minimax approach is also used to construct robust adaptive
estimation procedures [123, 124].
To apply the minimax robust algorithm, a “packet” procedure is required, in
which all the data required for the operation of the algorithm must first be written
into the DSP memory, and then an iterative procedure must be used. Consider the
organization of this data package in relation to radio navigation signals and the
mathematical formulation of the problems arising in this case.
For angular signals (e.g., in RSBN and MLS), time sampling of the input process
is natural.
x(ti ) = S(−
→
μ (ti ), ti ) + n i , i = 1, . . . , m, (6.40)
where ni = n(t i ); −
→
μ (ti )—vector of estimated parameters.
For angular RNS, the vector during the lifetime of the signal can be considered
time independent: − μ (ti ) = −
→ →
μ.
For ranging signals, temporal discretization is due to their pulse nature. After
detection, preselection, decoding, searching and detecting a signal sequence, the
temporal position of the normalized in amplitude and pulse duration is converted by

the reading device into a range estimate. Next, a final sample of m range estimates
obtained in tracking mode is processed: x i = R(t i ) + ni , i = 1, …, m, where R(t) is
the dependence of the measured distance on time.
If the change in the range R(t) during the sampling time can be neglected, then
the task is reduced to estimating a constant parameter in the system of equations
xi = R + n i , i = 1, . . . , m. (6.41)
Parameter estimation −
→
μ is reduced to solving a parametric nonlinear regression
problem, estimating parameter R to solving a parametric linear regression problem or
an equivalent problem estimating the shift parameter of the probability distribution
[125].
6.2.8.2 Robust Estimation of Linear Regression Parameters
Suppose that at the points ti ∈ T (i = 1, …, m), there are random quantities x i , which
can be represented as
μ T−
xi = −
→ →
ϕ (ti ) + n i , (6.42)
where x i are random variables equally

distributed
with the general distribution

function P σi xi −ai
and density w σi ; ai = μ T −
xi −ai −
→ →
ϕ (ti ); n i n j = σi2 δi j ;
% %
δi j —Kronecker symbol; n i = 0; Q x = % n i n j %.
A function − →
μ T− → ϕ (ti ) is called a linear regression function, depending on
the k-dimensional vector of unknown parameters − →
μ and the vector − →
ϕ (t) =
(ϕ1 (t), . . . , ϕk (t)) of given linearly independent functions on the set of T functions.
T
The challenge is to evaluate − →μ . In the matrix% notation −

→ x = (x1 , . . . , xm )T ,
−
→ %
% %
n = (n 1 , . . . , n m ) , = (ϕ1 (ti ), . . . , ϕk (ti )) = ϕi j , i = 1, …, m; j = 1, …, k,
T
observations (6.42) are written as

−
→
x = μ +−
−
→ →
n. (6.43)
The parameters σ i can be given or be evaluated together with μi . With equal obser-
vations (σ i = σ ), the reduced formulation of the problem is called the Gauss–Markov
scheme [125]. In particular, the estimation of the parameters of the polynomial model
of changing the range R(t) = R + vt + 0.5v̇t 2 .
We introduce loss functional Jm (− →μ ) = (−→x − − →μ )T P(−
→x − − →μ ).
The optimal estimate for the minimum J m will be a vector
−
→
μ OT = ( T
P )−1 T
P−
→
x. (6.44)
Moreover, the matrix T P is assumed to be nondegenerate. If P = I, then

−
→
μ OT is the LSM estimate. If P = Q −1
x , that is
⎡ ⎤2
m k
Jm (−
→
μ) = ⎣xi − ϕi j μ j ⎦ /σi2 , (6.45)
i=1 j=1
then, by the Gauss–Markov theorem, − →

μ OT is the estimate of the generalized
LSM providing the lowest value of J m in the class of estimates (6.44).
The asymptotic properties of LSM-estimates and the computational aspects of the
method are studied in detail [126–128]. In the Gaussian distribution ni with the known
matrix Qx , the estimates of the generalized LSM coincide with the asymptotically
effective ML-estimates μ ˆ ∗ maximizing the logarithm FLR
m k m k
L= ln w[(xi − ϕi j μ j )/σi ] = − ρ[(xi − ϕi j μ j /σi ], (6.46)
i=1 j=1 i=1 j=1
where ρ(y) = − ln w(y).

If this functional is differentiable, then the ML-estimate is among the solutions
of the system of likelihood equations.
m
& k
'
ϕi j ρ (xi − ϕil μl )/σi = 0.
i=1 l=1
ˆ ∗ are found by iterative procedural maximization of L [see

Practically, estimates μ
32].
The extensive experience of statistical studies over the years has shown the signif-
icant sensitivity of LSM-estimates and ML-estimates to changes in the distribution
density w(x). The creation of robust methods was caused by the desire to improve the
existing LSM schemes so that the emissions, ni, affect the estimation results as little as
possible. Most of the robust regression analysis methods are obtained by generalizing
the corresponding methods for estimating the distribution shift parameter.
M-estimation. M-estimates are a generalization of ML-estimates and are deter-
mined by minimizing the expression
m
&( k
) '
ρ xi − ϕil μl /σi ,
i=1 l=1
in which the function ρ(y) differs from the functions y2 and (−lnw(y)) and is
chosen based on assumptions about the distribution of P. In “close to Gaussian”
cases where the distribution of P belongs to the so-called clogging model [129]
species
P(−
→ μ ) = (1 − δ)P0 (−
x ,−
→ → μ ) + δ P1 (−
x ,−
→ →
x ),
where P0 is the Gaussian distribution, P1 is an arbitrary symmetric distribution, δ

is the degree of contamination, many of the M-estimation algorithms for the shift
parameter, developed in particular in [36, 130], give good results.
Another way is to use functions of the form ρ(y) = yd for various values of d
[129]. For a clogged Gaussian distribution of ni with increasing δ, lower values of d
should be used. In particular, a good compromise is considered to be d = 1.5; at the
same time, for strictly Gaussian distribution, the loss of estimation efficiency does
not exceed 5%. For heavily clogged distributions, d = 1.25 is recommended. In a
number of papers, the possibility of adaptive use of such estimates with adjustment
of the parameter d by a selective excess has been considered.
L-estimation. The L-estimation algorithms for the shift parameter are based on
the representation of independent observations x i by the variational series x (1) ≤ x (2)
≤ · · · ≤ x (m) . L-estimates of the shift parameter Q and the σ scale of the distri-
bution P((x − )/σ ) from which the sample was extracted are most often linear
combinations of order statistics x (i) [129]:

*
m *
m
= ci(m) x(i) ; ci(m) = 1;
i=1 i=1
*
m *m
σ̂ = di(m) x(i) ; di(m) = 1.
i=1 i=1
These include, in particular, the truncated, censored, winsorized and other aver-
ages. The main feature of L-estimates is that the coefficients ci(m) , di(m) can be chosen
in such a way that the given estimates are unbiased asymptotically effective.
The papers devoted to the generalization of the L-estimator for the case of
regression are analyzed in detail in [129].
R-estimation. This method is based on rank statistics and can be used to estimate
both distribution parameters and regression parameters. We modify the least squares
method by replacing one of the factors in the sum (6.45) with the rank Ri of the
residual νi = xi − −→μ T−
→ϕ (ti ). Obviously, Ri is a function −
→μ . Now the R-estimate
can be determined by minimizing the expression
m
μ T−
[xi − −
→ →
ϕ (ti )]Ri . (6.47)
i=1
In turn, expression
*m (6.47) can be generalized [129]. Let a(t) be a monotone func-
tion for which i=1 a(Ri ) = 0. From the values of a (t i ), we
*derive the variation series
a(i) . To get the R-score, you can minimize the expression i=1 m
[xi − −μ T−
→ →ϕ (ti )]a(i) .
Weights a(i) can be selected, for example, as follows:
a(i) = i, that is, the weights are equal to the ranks (Wilcoxon method);

−1, i < (m + 1)/2
a(i) = (median method);
1, i > (m + 1)/2
w [P −1 (t)]
a(i) = H [i/(m + 1)], where H (t) = − .
w[P −1 (t)]
In the latter case, the density w of the Gaussian distribution leads to the weights
of the LSM, the density w of a double exponential distribution to the weights of the
medians, the density w of the logistic distribution to the weights of Wilcoxon.
In a number of papers, it is proved that L-, R- and M-estimates are asymptotically
equivalent if the functions generating them are connected by certain relations. It is
also shown that, under certain conditions of regularity of distributions, R-estimates
are always more effective than their corresponding L-estimates.
Related scale estimates. When considering fasting estimates, it was considered
that the scale σ i is known and does not depend on i. If it is not known, but is constant,
then it can be estimated simultaneously with − →μ . The simplest robust estimates are
a linear combination of order statistics. In particular, a high quality has an estimate
equal to the median of nonzero deviations: σ̂ = med xi − − →μ T−
→ϕ (ti ) /0.6745.
6.2.8.3 Robust Estimation of Nonlinear Regression Parameters
Suppose that at the points t i , random values x i of the form (6.40) are observed, where
−
→
μ (ti ) is the vector of unknown estimated parameters; n i = n(ti )—mutually inde-
pendent random values having the same distribution with zero mean and variances
σi2 .
If the covariance noise matrix with diagonal elements σi2 is known and does not
depend on − →
μ , then this model describes the classical nonlinear regression problem.
Put νi = [xi − S(− →μ (ti )]/σi . Then the LSM-estimate
m
ˆ m = arg min Q(−
μ →
μ ), where Q(−
→
μ) = νi2 . (6.48)
−
→ μ
i=1
For this estimate, numerical minimization methods are used [128, 131], most of
which are expressed by iteration formulas
μ ˆ l − γl [ψ T (μ
ˆ l+1 = μ ˆ l )ψ(μ
ˆ l ) + βl C]−1 ψ T (μ
ˆ l )Y (μ
ˆ l) (6.49)
ˆ 0 —initial approximation; C is a non-negative

where γ l > 0; β l ≥ 0; l = 0, 1, …; μ
definite matrix;
μ ) = (x1 − S(−
Y (−
→ →
μ , t1 ), . . . , xm − S(−
→
μ , tm ))T ;
( )
ˆ l) = ∂S ∂S
ψ(μ ,..., .
∂μ1 −
→ ˆl
μ =μ ∂μκ −
→ ˆl
μ =μ
If β l > 0, then (6.49) is called the Marquardt method; if β l = 0, γl =

arg min Q(μ ˆ l+1 ), by the Hartley method; if β l = 0, γ l = 1 is the Gauss–Newton
method. The most commonly used is the Marquardt method, which allows to ensure
the convergence of estimates. The iteration process (6.49) means that the score μ ˆ
is calculated as the limit of the sequence of solutions of linear regression problems
based on a sample of size m. At the lth iteration, the derivatives of S with respect
to μi at a point μ ˆ l, −
→
μ are calculated which is replaced in the neighborhood μ ˆ l by a
−
→
linear μ form, and the linear regression problem of finding the next approximation
is solved − →
μ l+1 .
If the values of ni are Gaussian with the same known variances, the LSM-estimate
coincides with the ML-estimates [132].
Changing any of the conditions of the classical regression problem generates a
non-standard regression problem. Consider a few such cases.
1. The regression problem with the variance of errors σ 2 (− →μ , ti ), depending on
−
→
all parameters included in S( μ , t ). The corresponding regression model is
i
called the F-model. For it, there is a generalization of the iterative Gauss–
Newton algorithm called IRGINA [132]. Another iterative algorithm based on
the method of fixing parameters is
m
ˆ l+1 = arg min
μ −
→
[xi − S(−
→ ˆ l , ti ).
μ , ti )]2 /σ 2 (μ (6.50)
μ
i=1
ˆ l in the dispersion are

At the lth iteration of the main algorithm, the parameters μ
fixed, so the DUD method [133] can be used for the calculation.
2. The regression problem with the variance of errors σ 2 (− →μ 1 , ti ) depending on
−
→
the parameters μ , partially coinciding with μ .−
→
1
The solution method [132] is based on the following property: the average values
[xi − S(− →
μ , ti )]2 are equal σ 2 (−
→
μ , ti ), and the variances in the case of Gaussian
4 −
→
errors ni are equal 2σ ( μ , ti ). This property makes it possible to estimate at once
all the parameters − →μ in the problem with 2 m observations {x i }, {[xi − S(μˆ l , ti )]2 },
−
→
i = 1, m, where μ l is a certain approximation. The iterative process is
m
$
ˆ l+1 = arg min
μ −
→
[xi − S(−
→ ˆ l , ti )
μ , ti )]2 /σ 2 (μ
μ
i=1
ˆ l , ti ))2 − σ 2 (−
+ [(xi − S(μ → ˆ l , ti )] } .
μ , ti )]2 /[2σ 4 (μ (6.51)
Numerical experiments show that estimates (6.51) are not only for Gaussian errors,
although, in view of the Gaussian errors, it is recommended to give preference to the
algorithm (6.50).
3. Robust evaluation. The most commonly used M-estimates are of the form
m
ˆ = arg min
μ −
→
ρ[xi − S(−
→
μ , ti )], (6.52)
μ
i=1
ˆ
where ρ(y) is a convex symmetric function. In [126], it is proposed to calculate μ
using an iterative process
ρ[xi − S(−
→
m
μ , ti )]
ˆ l+1 = arg min
μ [xi − S(−
→
μ , ti )]2 ,
−
→ μ ˆ
[xi − S(μl , ti )]2
i=1
to calculate the coordinates of the minimum used DUD method.

The choice of the loss function ρ(y) is the most important part of the solution to
the regression problem. A large number of papers, the most important of which are
[36, 37], are devoted to the study of robust estimates for various functions ρ(y). The
theory of minimax robust estimation was developed in [36, 123, 124] and other works
of these authors. In this theory, sequences of recurrent estimates are considered μ ˆ m.
With a growing sample after receiving a new value of x m+1 , a new value of the estimate
μˆ m+1 can be obtained from μ ˆ m and x m+1 . The estimate μˆ m is an approximation to
ˆ
the optimal estimate μ constructed by the criterion of the minimum average risk
with the loss function ρ. Under certain assumptions about the smoothness of ρ and
the convexity of the risk function, the estimates μ ˆ m converge with a probability of 1
from μ.ˆ
The quality of the recurrent estimates is described by the asymptotic matrix V of
estimation covariations (AMEC):
+ ,
ˆ m − μ)(
V = lim mVm = lim m (μ ˆ μ ˆ m − μ)
ˆ T.
m→∞ m→∞
In the case of a nonlinear regression model in which the random variables ni

are equally distributed with the density w(y), the matrix V depends on ρ(y). The
determination of the functions w(y) and ρ(y) that provide extrema for AMECs forms
the basis of this theory, shown, that
⎧ ∞ 0⎡ ∞
⎤2 ⎫
⎨ ⎬
V (ρ, w) = w(y)[ρ (y)]2 dy ⎣ ˆ
w(y)ρ (y)dy ⎦ X −1 (μ),
⎩ ⎭
−∞ −∞
where the normalized information matrix X does not depend on w(y).

For the matrix V m , the Rao–Kramer inequality holds
1 ˆ
Vm ≥ X −1 (μ)
m I (w)
where I(w) is the amount of Fisher information. Passing to the limit as

m → ∞, we get
1 ˆ
V (ρ, w) ≥ X −1 (μ). (6.53)
I (w)
The optimal loss function ρ 0 (y) is the loss function, which minimizes the AMEC
on a certain class R of acceptable loss functions:
ρ0 = arg min V (ρ, w).

ρ∈R
The solution of the problem is [36] the loss function ρ 0 (y) = −ln w(y),
corresponding to the ML-estimation. When this is achieved equality in (6.53),
∞ ∞
[ρ0 (y)] w(y)dy =

2
ρ0 (y)w(y)dy = I (w)
−∞ −∞
and the risk reaches a minimum value equal to the entropy of the distribution with
a density w(y).
Thus, asymptotically optimal estimates by the criterion of the minimum average
risk for a known density w(y) are ML-estimates. However, if the density of the
distribution deviates from w(y), for which the loss function is chosen, the AMEC
value increases. Often, even with a small difference in these densities, the AMEC
can be arbitrarily large. In this connection, the problem arose of synthesizing loss
functions that are robust to variations in the noise distribution density.
We assume that w(y) is unknown, but the class P is given: P: w(y) ∈ P. Find
the least favorable density from the condition of the minimum amount of Fisher
information and, consequently, the maximum of the AMEC:
w0 = arg min I (w). (6.54)

w∈P
The optimal loss function for density (6.54) is
ρ0 (y) = − ln w0 (y). (6.55)
Under conditions (6.54)–(6.55), Huber’s theorem [36] is valid: The pair (ρ 0 , w0 )

is the saddle point of the functional
∞ 0⎡ ∞
⎤2
σ02 (ρ, w) = [ρ (y)]2 w(y)dy ⎣ ρ (y)w(y)dy ⎦ ,

−∞ −∞
i.e. σ02 (ρ0 , w) ≤ σ0 (ρ0 , w0 ) ≤

2
σ02 (ρ, w0 ).
This means that the density w0 (y) with the optimal choice of the loss function
corresponds to the greatest dispersion σ02 , i.e., this distribution is the least favorable,
and at the same time, when w = w0 compared to other loss functions, the choice of ρ
= ρ 0 provides the smallest dispersion value σ02 . In this connection, the loss function
ρ 0 and the corresponding estimates are called minimax. The densities w0 and loss
functions ρ 0 for a number of basic classes P are given in [123].
The AMEC differs from σ02 the matrix multiplier X −1 , which does not depend on
w and ρ. Therefore, the above theorem is valid for the AMEC nonlinear regression
model.
The construction of minimax robust estimates theoretically provides for the
creation of meters with guaranteed accuracy. To do this, it suffices to find the least
favorable distribution w0 in a given class P, calculate ρ 0 by Formula (6.55) and verify
that σ02 (ρ0 , w0 ) ≤ σ pr
2
. Next are the M-estimates of the parameters by the criterion
(6.52) with ρ = ρ 0 .
The choice of class P for solving specific problems is justified by a priori infor-
mation and the results of comparative modeling. When finding the minimax esti-
mate by the stochastic gradient method, the recurrence estimates μ ˆ m are calculated
ˆ ˆ −
→ ˆ ˆ
by the formula μm = μm−1 − κm ∇ μ S(μm−1 , tm ) [S(μm−1 , tm ) − xm ], where
(y) = ρ (y) and where κ m is the matrix gain.
A detailed study of such algorithms was carried out in [123]. It also contains the
optimal recurrent procedures for some classes of distributions.
6.2.8.4 Robust Primary Meters of Angular-Dimensional Signals
Based on the above approach, we can propose the following groups of robust
algorithms for estimating the temporal position of goniometric signals [32, 122].
1. Immediate robust estimation of all parameters − →
μ of nonlinear regression,
including amplitude, temporal position and in some cases the duration of the
detected goniometric signal. The most universal is Marquardt’s algorithm, which
provides obtaining of convergent estimates for an arbitrary admissible function
w ∈ P.
2. Formation of several partial estimates 1 , …, m of the parameter using

the same sample and construction of the output evaluation of the meter

˜ = (1 , . . . , m ). Partial estimates i can be obtained, for example,

by the method of noise-resistant multi-level fixation of the temporal position
of the signal [32] or by various minimax robust estimation methods. When
constructing ˜ an output estimate, a robust algorithm is used instead of an

LSM, for example, M-estimation.
3. Using robust sliding algorithms based on censored or winsorized estimates for
smoothing the goniometric signal received on the background of the pulse inter-
ference. According to calculations, the sliding median algorithm with a right-
angle weight function already provides a significant reduction in measurement
errors.
4. Adaptive-robust algorithms. In [32], adaptive Bayesian algorithms for joint reso-
lution and parameter estimation of signals under the action of passive interfer-
ence were considered. They are optimal for the possible effects of this inter-
ference and Gaussian noise. If the noise is not Gaussian, or other interference
combinations are in effect, then the characteristics of the algorithms may deteri-
orate. This is due to the fact that the algorithm includes meters that are optimal
by the criterion of maximum likelihood. To ensure the stability of the char-
acteristics of the entire adaptive algorithm, it is necessary to measure meters
that calculate the ML-estimates by robust meters that calculate, for example,
M-estimates.
The formulated problems of robust estimation can be solved by both non-recurrent
and recurrent methods described above. The choice of a particular method is deter-
mined by the sample size, the allowable increase in the discreteness of the issuance
of estimates compared to the input data resolution and the computational capabilities
of the meter.
When estimating the changing parameters of signals, robust recurrent algorithms
are constructed, for example, based on the introduction of a certain kind of nonlin-
earity into the Kalman filter circuit, associated with the model of the uncertainty of
the distribution of observation noise [40].
6.3 Functional Structure of Airborne Data Signal

Processing Devices
Airborne digital data transmission systems together with voice communication

systems are united by the general concept of aviation communication systems.
Despite the considerable variety of signal processing algorithms, caused primarily
by the use of various types of modulation and message coding methods, the airborne
equipment of an aviation communication system can be represented by a generalized
block diagram (Fig. 6.8), reflecting the main stages of the formation and processing
signals and messages [134].
For communication systems used in international civil aviation, modulation
(demodulation), encoding (decoding), scrambling (descrambling), shaping and
processing of messages are determined, first of all, by ICAO standards and recom-
mendations, ARINC, RTCA, which define protocols at various levels in accordance
with the basic open system interaction model of OSI (see Chap. 5).
6.3 Functional Structure of Airborne Data Signal Processing Devices 313
To message
Message playback
recipient
Receiver Demodulator Descrambler Decoder device
From message
Message Generator
source
Transmitter Modulator Scrambler Coder
Modem Codec
Fig. 6.8 Generalized structural diagram of the avionics communications system
At the same time, taking into account the effect of interference requires the
improvement of signal and message processing algorithms, which is the subject
of study of the statistical communication theory [135]. To determine the optimal
structure of processing units, the same methods of optimal nonlinear filtering of
random processes are used, as for the synthesis of algorithms for processing radio
navigation signals [70], methods of coding theory, methods of the classical theory
of statistical solutions [136], etc. Since in aviation communication systems, as in
radio navigation systems, disturbances (interruptions) in the reception of signals are
possible, and the input communication signals can be described by models similar
to radio navigation.
Studies show that the resulting optimal synthesis algorithms are similar to those
obtained for radio navigation signals, but differ in a number of features. First,
message models in communication systems in the general case are discrete–contin-
uous, which leads to the complication of the smoothing filter and extrapolation and
the emergence of its additional connections with the discriminator (or primary meter).
Secondly, in communication systems with complex signals, synchronization signals
are transmitted, which requires the introduction of additional processing channels
(e.g., synchronization with subexisting and clock frequencies for PSK signals [137]).
The main operations of the optimal processing algorithm (reception) of a complex
connected signal in a Gaussian channel are the formation of a likelihood ratio and
the determination of a primary estimate of the informative signal parameter. In this
case, the functions of the DSP will be the optimal digital filtering of signals, the
optimal demodulation, descrambling and the decoding of error correction messages,
i.e., procedures attributable to the OSI base reference model to the physical layer.
Procedures of the data link layer and the subnetwork level can be performed
both in the DSP (if it has the necessary computing resources) and in a special data
processor.
6.4 Principles of Complexing of Navigation Meters
The complexing of measuring instruments in the REC (complex processing of infor-

mation (CPI) is called joint processing by several meters of information about the
same or functionally related parameters with the combination of processing results
[87]. From the point of view of system integration, complex processing of informa-
tion is one of the areas of functional integration (the use of various resources to solve
one functional task).
The CPI systems usually consist of two classes of meters: autonomous, non-
terrestrial, and non-autonomous radio engineering, which are part of radio systems
that have ground (space) stations. Autonomous non-radiotechnical meters (ANRM)
determine the navigation elements of the movement of the aircraft. These include,
in particular, the INS, ADS and CS. The autonomous radiotechnical meters include
the DSDM and RA. Non-autonomous radiotechnical meters include avionics RSBN,
VOR, DME, GNSS, ILS, MLS, PRMG, etc.
Depending on the combination of the used autonomous meters in FMCS,
various methods for calculating the path are implemented: inertia-Doppler, course-
Doppler, inertial, course-air. In some cases, a combined calculation method is used—
course-Doppler and course-air. Complex processing of information is carried out
simultaneously with the reckoning of the path [88].
The main goal of any method of complexing of REC meters is to achieve the
highest (for a given composition of meters and computational tools) indicators for the
accuracy and continuity of determining navigation parameters of flight. The greatest
gain in the accuracy of estimating the navigation parameters can be achieved when
the spectral characteristics of the errors of the meters are different. Continuity is
achieved due to the fact that in the event of the disappearance of the information of
the radiotechnical system, the previously corrected information of the autonomous
non-radiotechnical sensor is used.
Two approaches are possible to build a system for the complex processing of
navigation information [87, 138]. According to the first of these, when processing
incoming measurements, a priori information about the dynamics of the aircraft is
used. Such an approach makes it possible to achieve the highest possible accuracy
for estimating navigation parameters for a given set of measuring tools. However,
its use leads to an increase in the dimension of the state vector of the system and,
consequently, to an increase in the computational cost of implementing the CPI
algorithm. An alternative approach is to synthesize an algorithm that is invariant
to the movement of an object based on the principle of information distribution. Its
essence in relation to CPI is to identify some basic navigation system, which provides
the definition of basic navigation parameters in accordance with the so-called ideal
work algorithms. The CPI task is formulated as a task of clarifying (correcting)
the readings of this system using additional navigation information. The use of this
approach makes it possible to avoid the introduction of a stochastic model of aircraft
dynamics and reduce the task to estimating errors of the basic system [138].
6.4 Principles of Complexing of Navigation Meters 315
There are several heuristic methods of complexing using the invariance principle:
a compensation scheme, a filtering scheme and a tracking meter scheme [87]. The
most preferred is the tracking meter scheme, which allows using simple means to
ensure that the CPI algorithm is switched from the joint data processing mode to the
tracking mode according to autonomous data when a radio signal is lost. In addition,
such a scheme makes it possible to simply enter information from the ANRM into
the tracking ring of the radio meter, even if the autonomous sensor measures not the
coordinates of the aircraft, but their derivatives. When software implementation of
filtering algorithms is in the airborne computer, the principle of invariance is carried
out by creating a special system of difference equations, which excludes a number
of unknowns describing the motion of the aircraft.
These methods are useful in explaining the principles of integration, but they are
a certain idealization. In practice, the method of radio correction ANRM is often
used. At the same time, complex meters and autonomous navigation systems with
radio correction [139] are distinguished. The basis of the integrated radio meter
(small integrated navigation system (SCNS) [140]) is radio engineering STM, and
autonomous data is used to ensure continuity and improve the accuracy of radio
engineering measurements. In the airborne computer, SCNS coordinates are calcu-
lated according to the ANRM, and the STM data is periodically or continuously fed
into the computer for passive correction of the numerical coordinates, which means
determining and entering the coordinates into the computer without eliminating the
causes of the calculation error [139]. In autonomous navigation systems with radio
correction, the basis is ANRM. Radio correction can be either passive (in the FNC
computer) or active (in a stand-alone sensor). A typical example of an autonomous
navigation system with radio correction is integrated GNSS-INS equipment.
When integrating radio navigation sensors with non-radiotechnical sensors, it is
quite arbitrary to subdivide complex processing into primary and secondary [87]. The
primary complex processing is understood as the primary processing of radio navi-
gation signals, in which data from non-radiotechnical meters is additionally used. By
secondary complex processing of information, it is possible to call various computa-
tional actions on the output data of meters, each of which works independently, as a
rule, without introducing additional signals from other information sources [87, 88]
into it.
Modern theoretical studies and the implementation of integrated navigation infor-
mation processing use state space methods, in particular, the Markov theory of esti-
mating random processes. A large number of optimal and quasi-optimal filtering algo-
rithms for the combination of processes have been obtained, which fundamentally
allow solving complexing problems without dividing the processing into primary
and secondary [62, 87, 106]. However, the practical application of the proposed
algorithms for the integration of radio navigation meters and ANRM presents signif-
icant difficulties, as it provides for the optimization of the entire measuring and
measuring path of the navigation landing avionics in the preposition that the beacons
emit coherent signals and coherent processing. In this case, the state variable vector
contains more than a dozen parameters and solving the filtering equations in a
simplified form on a real-time scale when integrating even one radio meter with
one non-radio engineering one becomes very difficult [87].
The task is even more complicated when trying to implement CPI without sepa-
ration into primary and secondary processing in integrated avionics. The need to
implement specific feedbacks from the CPI filter to receivers and processors of
signal processing as well as cross-links between the STM of various systems makes
it difficult to universalize the avionics paths.
The method of optimizing CPI algorithms with separate primary processing of
radio signals seems to be more realistic, which uses a simplified state model based on
differences in the dynamics of radiotechnical and non-radiotechnical observations
(the first is usually continuous, and the second is discrete) [71, 141]. Simplification of
models consists in the possibility of describing the dynamics of parameters of signals
of many radio-measuring meters at characteristic time intervals (e.g., pulse duration
or burst) by quasi-random processes [62], which makes it possible to introduce two-
stage processing. At the first stage, radiotechnical signals are processed, as there
are no observations from the ANRM during characteristic intervals. The processing
algorithm for the first stage is obtained by the exact solution of the Stratonovich
equation. At the second stage, they are processed in real discrete observation time
from the ANRM taking into account the full dynamics of the state vector, and the
parameter estimates obtained at the first stage are used as observations. Thus, at the
second stage, only discrete signals are processed that are linearly dependent on the
state vector and; as a result, it is possible to obtain an exact solution to the Stratonovich
equation [71].
CPI algorithms with separate radio signal processing are characterized by the
absence of cross-links between radio signal processing channels, which simplifies
the development of integrated avionics, simplifies the process of its reconfiguration
at different flight stages and in case of STM failures and simplifies modification of
avionics. At the same time, the advantages of the integration of gages at the level of
primary processing as a whole remain.
Optimization of CPI with separate primary processing of radio signals allows
introducing into the general information processing structure of the aviation REC
the device (algorithms) of functional monitoring and selection of the configuration
of integrated avionics, considering, in some cases, its optimization together with CPI
algorithms. The issues of building a CPI integrated fail-safety avionics system are
discussed in clause 6.7.
Thus, in the practical development of integrated avionics, it is advisable to
consider the integration in the framework of two-stage processing, optimizing the
secondary complex processing and introducing elements of complexation at the
primary processing level as far as it does not contradict the principles of integration
and is possible with the existing level of technology.
One of the most important and intensively studied areas of the CPI is the
joint processing of information from GNSS and other radiotechnical and non-
radiotechnical systems, the equipment of which can be part of FNC (inertial (INS)
and inertial-Doppler navigation systems, course systems, RA, BA, etc.). Detailed
reviews of the basic principles, directions, methods and methods of aggregation of
consumer equipment (CE) of GNSS and other meters, in which the obtained results
are analyzed and directions for further research and development are indicated and
are given in [94, 95]. Considerable attention is paid to CPI GNSS and other systems
at the international conferences on integrated navigation systems held annually in
St. Petersburg. Some results reported at these conferences were published in the
collection [142].
Let us briefly dwell on a number of works of recent years, from which one can
judge the methods used by CPI.
Theoretically, a significant improvement in the operability of the CE GNSS can be
achieved through comprehensive primary information processing (PIP). Integration
of devices and systems at the PIP level allows you to:
• reduce the search time signals in the search-tracking testers;
• reduce or completely eliminate the likelihood of false STM seizures and reduce
the likelihood of disruption of tracking parameters of radio signals;
• improve the accuracy and noise immunity characteristics of the STM in tracking
mode and eliminate or reduce the methodological errors of the meters.
The transfer of estimates of current coordinates, speed and time from FNC to
CE GNSS allows us to narrow the range of a priori values of delays and Doppler
frequencies, to reduce the search time. The use of orientation angles makes it possible
to realize antenna systems with controlled radiation patterns, which expands the
possibilities of the operation of aircraft in a complex interfering environment [94].
The above difficulties of CPI implementation without separation into primary and
secondary processing force researchers to apply multi-stage processing. In [143], the
task of integrating the GPS and RSDN information at the PIP level is solved by finding
the best estimate that minimizes a posteriori risk.
In [144], it is proposed to implement a three-stage complex processing of signals
and GPS data, RSDN and INS: at stage 1, to process GPS signals, then at stage 2—to
process GPS and RSDN signals as RSDN signals arrive, then stage 3—implement
the integration of GPS, RSDN with INS. It is also proposed to organize the mutual
control of the correctness of GPS, RSDN and INS meters at zero probability of failure
of two or three meters. It is shown that the gain from the CPI is most noticeable in a
complex noise environment, with large geometric factors of GPS, when working with
an incomplete constellation and in the case of anomalous modes of GPS operation.
In [145], algorithms for complex PIP of GNSS signals were synthesized using
data from the INS, RA and BA. The paper uses the method of step-by-step solution
of the Stratonovich equation. At stage 1, the GNSS and RA radio signals are jointly
processed, and at stage 2, taking into account the complete state vector, data is
processed from the INS and BA outputs.
In [146], the problem of synthesizing suboptimal algorithms for nonlinear estima-
tion of navigation parameters when receiving GNSS signals was solved taking into
account the polymodality of the a posteriori probability density. In [141], in which
algorithms for nonlinear filtering of parameters of signals and CPI were obtained for
separate solving of the Stratonovich equations, an example of using these algorithms
for the joint processing of GNSS, RSBN and INS signals is given. The example
shows that the corresponding deterioration in accuracy compared with the similar
characteristics of the optimal algorithm of the complex PIP of these systems is
insignificant.
The joint processing of GNSS and INS information allows, along with an increase
in accuracy, to ensure an increase in the quality of the work of autonomous GNSS
integrity monitoring [147].
In [148], the suboptimal CPI GNSS, INS, RA and BA algorithm were synthesized.
A special feature of this algorithm is also a two-stage signal and data processing
procedure: At stage 1, during the transmission of GNSS service information (T =
20 ms), the radio signals of GNSS and RA are processed using a nonlinear estimation
algorithm obtained by solving the Stratonovich equation followed by transition to a
suboptimal algorithm based on Gaussian approximation. The discriminators of each
of the GNSS and RA receivers are developed separately for their particular state
space.
At stage 2, the obtained estimates of the parameters and output data of the INS
and BA are processed together. The algorithm of joint discrete estimation in the form
of an extended Kalman filter gives suboptimal energy parameter estimates used in
the device for selecting the working constellation of navigation satellite, i.e., in the
process of preprocessing GNSS signals and output estimates of navigation parameters
(aircraft coordinates, component ground speed vectors, etc.). This algorithm allows
for the implementation of autonomous integrity monitoring in the CE GNSS and to
meet the high requirements for accuracy, noise immunity, integrity, imposed on the
work of FNC at the time of approach and landing of the aircraft.
This complex system can be used as a source of navigation information at the
approach and landing stage instead of a single-function CE GNSS. The data from
the output of this complex system is then fed to the integrated avionics, where they
are recalculated, taking into account the GBAS information, into deviations from the
synthesized approach trajectory.
Since the system provides for the joint processing of information of systems not
included in the integrated avionics, this algorithm does not complicate the possible
reconfiguration of the integrated avionics, while providing FNC with reliable naviga-
tion information in real-time conditions characterized by shadowing, multipathing,
breaks in tracking of satellites, poor geometry of visible satellites, etc.
Integration at the level of secondary information processing (SIP) of GNSS and
other systems provides [94]
• specification of orientation angles (heading, pitch and roll), estimation and adjust-
ment of calibration parameters of navigation sensors, such as gyro drifts, scale
factors and displacement of accelerometers;
• continuity on this basis of navigation definitions of the aircraft and improving the
accuracy of determining the coordinates, altitude and speed of the aircraft at all
stages of flight, including the temporary failure of the CE GNSS in the event of
interference or fast maneuvers of the aircraft;
• improving integrity characteristics by providing autonomous monitoring in
addition to integrity monitoring implemented in the CE (RAIM);
• reducing the time for searching and entering into the tracking mode, as well
as improving the characteristics of the tracking loops on the code, frequency
and phase of the carrier frequency, narrowing the bandwidth and, consequently,
increasing the noise immunity of the CE GNSS.
Integration at the SIP level is carried out in the navigation filter. Depending on
the place of implementation of the filter and the nature of feedbacks, there are
open, weakly coupled, strongly connected and deeply integrated integration schemes
(Fig. 6.9).
An open circuit assumes a separate (without feedback) operation of the CE GNSS,
INS, ADS as a barometric height sensor and airborne time and frequency standard
(TFS). The main output parameters of the CE GNSS are geodetic latitude and longi-
tude (BG , L G ), height above the level of the HG ellipsoid of reference, components of
the velocity in the directions “east,” “north” and “up” (V NG , V EG , V HG ), correction
to the time scale T and the drift of the frequency f of the TFS with respect to the
GNSS scale, if the synchronization of the CE clock with the TFS is assumed. Raw
data can also be sent from the CE GNSS to the navigation filter—pseudo-range Di
and pseudo-velocity estimates Ḋi .
INS output parameters are BI , L I , HI, V NI , V EI , V HI ; ADS is the absolute height
of H A and its rate of change of V HA ; TFS—timeline readings T A and frequency f A .
In a loosely coupled integration scheme, a link is implemented from the INS to the
CE GNSS (dashed line in Fig. 6.9a), providing faster search and entry into tracking.
Controls from the navigation filter in the INS can also be implemented to correct
orientation errors and errors of inertial sensors.
A strongly related integration scheme (Fig. 6.9b) is implemented in a single unit
consisting of three modules (a GNSS receiver, an INS sensitive element module and
an INS computer module). Embedding a GNSS receiver in an INS is necessary if
external inter-unit lines of information exchange are much slower in operation than
inter-module lines of information exchange.
In the INS computer, both the basic INS algorithms and the complex processing
algorithms for the correction of numerical data are implemented. In addition, from the
output of the filter, the coordinates ( B̂, L̂, Ĥ ) and velocity estimates (V̂N , V̂E , V̂H )
go to the GNSS receiver to speed up the search, and the estimates D̂, Ḋˆ to improve
the code and frequency tracking process.
If the GNSS receiver also has a navigation filter, a redundancy circuit is obtained.
Examples of such an architecture are the LN-100G equipment f.Litton and H-764G
f.Honeywell.
A deeply integrated circuit contains a simplified satellite receiver with a radio
frequency part, a cogenerator, correlators and a search device, a block of sensitive
elements of the INS and a computer that implements the free INS algorithm and an
optimal estimate of the parameters Di , Ḋi and vector of true motion parameters. In
the GNSS receiver, there are no tracking loops Di , Ḋi . The task of determining the
latter is the responsibility of the navigation filter. Thus, a deeply integrated circuit
partially combines PIP and SIP.
a Estimates of navigation
SRNS receiver parameters by SRNS
Search Data Comprehensive

estimates of
navigation
Computer parameters
IRS (navigation filter)
ADS
TFS
b Pseudorange and pseudo-

SRNS receiver velocity estimates
Comprehensive
estimates of
pseudorange and Comprehensive
d d estimates of
navigation
IRS Computer
parameters
(accelerometers, (platformless INS
gyroscopes) algorithms,
navigation filter)
ADS
TFS
Fig. 6.9 a Open and loosely coupled schemes of complexing. b Strongly connected scheme of
complexing. c Deeply integrated scheme of complexing
c Comprehensive estimates of pseudorange

SRNS receiver (radio and pseudo-speeds
frequency unit, code
generators, correlators) Correlator outputs
Comprehensive
estimates of
navigation
IRS Computer
parameters
(accelerometers, (platformless INS
gyroscopes) algorithms,
navigation filter)
ADS
TFS
Fig. 6.9 (continued)
The analysis shows [94] that in modern foreign military aircrafts mainly a strongly
related integration scheme is implemented.
When creating an integrated avionics of navigation, landing, data exchange and
air traffic control, the use of a separate constantly operating channel of the CE GNSS
seems to be preferable, since the GNSS information is used in almost all operating
modes of the avionics. Therefore, it makes no sense to include a function GNSS in
the tunable avionics structure.
The choice of the scheme for the complexing of GNSS and other systems infor-
mation depends largely on the performance of the DP and the speed of the GNSS
communications interface with the DP. If there are several DPs, one of them can
constantly carry out complex processing of GNSS and other systems information.
At the same time, this DP cannot serve as an INS computer; tightly coupled and
deeply integrated circuits are not implemented.
However, it is possible to use instead of a separate CE GNSS channel a strongly
interconnected or deeply integrated GNSS-INS system, which constantly serves the
integrated avionics in all modes of its operation. In this case, the DP for the integration
of GNSS and SINS information is not used, and the navigation filter in the GNSS-INS
system acts as a local complex filter.
Next, we will consider one of the areas of integrated data processing—algo-
rithms for multichannel data processing of radiotechnical meters. The following
solutions for the processing of navigation information do not claim to be finite and,
to a certain extent, are only examples of functional integration (data fusion) in the
navigation system. Other solutions are possible, in particular, based on fuzzy or
robust filtering, other alarms detection algorithms, etc. “It is always useful to process
the same source data in several different ways. Conclusions that coincide with all
methods of processing, in accordance with the theory of plausibility of D. Poya, have
more chances to adequately reflect reality than those obtained using only one method
of processing. On the other hand, everything that takes place with one method of
processing and does not take place with another reflects, apparently, the properties
of algorithms, rather than reality” [149].
6.5 Multichannel Data Processing Radio Meters
6.5.1 Multichannel Linear Estimation of Radio Data
Joint processing of measurements from several radiotechnical meters with different

spectra of measurement errors can improve the accuracy of estimating the state vector
of an aircraft compared to using measurements of the same STM. At the same time,
however, the computational costs associated with the implementation and operation
of the CPI in the airborne computer increase. In order to reduce computational costs,
a rational structure of a multichannel filter should be chosen.
Let us now consider the CPI algorithms in radio navigation avionics. To do this,
we first formulate the problem of optimal discrete linear filtering for the equation
of state describing the change in the vector of navigation parameters common to m
radiotechnical meters. We will consider the equation of state
−
→ −
→
ρ (k) = (k, k − 1)−
→
ρ (k − 1) + (k − 1) ζ (k − 1), (6.19)
−
→ −
→
where the state noise ζ (k) has an average ζ 0 (k) and a covariance matrix Q(k).
The measurement equation of the ith meter is written in the form of a sequence of
→∗
− −
→

vectors (k) of the maximum likelihood vector estimates (k) = H (k)−

i i
→ρ (k):
i
∗
−
→

−
→
y i (k) = i (k) = Hi (k)−
→
ρ (k) + −
→
ν i (k), (6.56)
where the sequence of vectors − →ν i (k) of measurement errors has zero mean and
covariance matrix Ri (k). With known matrices , , Q, Ri , P(0) and vectors − →ρ (0),
−
→
ζ 0 (k), the discrete Kalman linear filter for Eqs. (6.19) and (6.56) is described by
the relations
ρˆ i (k) = ρˆ ei (k) + K i (k)−

→
z i (k) (6.57a)
−
→
z i (k) = −
→
y i (k) − Hi (k)ρˆ ei (k) (6.57b)
6.5 Multichannel Data Processing Radio Meters 323
−
→
ρˆ ei (k) = (k, k − 1)ρˆ i (k − 1) + (k − 1) ζ 0 (k − 1) (6.57c)
K i (k) = Pi (k)Hi (k)Ri−1 (k)

= Pei (k)HiT (k) × [Hi (k)Pei (k)HiT (k) + Ri (k)]−1 (6.57d)
Pi (k) = [Pei−1 (k) + HiT (k)Ri−1 (k)Hi (k)]−1 (6.57e)
Pei (k + 1) = (k, k − 1)Pi (k − 1) T

(k, k − 1)
+ (k − 1)Q(k − 1) (k − 1).
T
(6.57f)
We note the following useful results arising from Formulas (6.57d)–(6.57f):
I − K i (k)Hi (k) = Pi (k)Pei (k), (6.57g)
Pi−1 (k) = Pei−1 (k) + HiT (k)Ri−1 (k)Hi (k). (6.57h)
Let us compare Formulas (6.57a)–(6.57h) with the quasilinear algorithm for

APM-estimation obtained in Sect. 6.2, transforming it for the input observation
process in the form of ML-estimates of the vector of informative parameters
−
→
i (k) = Hi (k)−
→
ρ (k).
The relationship between ML-estimates and APM-estimates of extrapolation of
navigation parameters is expressed by the equation
∗
ρˆ i (k) = ρˆ ei (k) + X i−1 (k)HiT (k)−
→
z i (k), (6.58)
where X i (k) = H i T (k)C i (k)H i (k) is a Hessian with elements;

−
→ ∂ L i (−
→
ximn = ∂∂ρLmi (∂ρρn ) —vector whose components are equal z i j = ρ (k))
2
∂ j
;
−
→
C i (k) is a Hessian with elements cimn = ∂ ∂
L i ( ρ (k))
2
m ∂n
.
In the equation for the APM-estimation of the ith meter, the observation vector is
the vector
ρˆ i (k) = ρˆ ei (k) + Pi (k)HiT (k)−

→
z i (k) (6.59)
where Pi (k) is the covariance matrix of filtering errors by the ith vector meter −
→
ρ (k).
Let us find the equation relating the estimates and the ML-estimates of the
informative parameters i∗ (k). From Eq. (6.58), we get
∗
X i (k)[ρˆ i (k) − ρˆ ei (k)] = HiT (k)−
→
z i (k). (6.60)
Substituting (6.60) into (6.59), we get

ρˆ i (k) = ρˆ ei (k) + Pi (k)HiT (k)Ci (k)[−

→y i (k) − Hi (k)ρˆ ei (k)]
= ρˆ ei (k) + K i (k)[−
→
y i (k) − Hi (k)ρˆ ei (k)], (6.61)
where
K i (k) = Pi (k)HiT (k)Ci (k) = Pei (k)HiT (k)[Hi (k)Pei (k)HiT (k) + Ci−1 (k)]−1 .
Comparing (6.61) with (6.57a–6.57h), we find that when C(k) = R−1 i (k), the linear
part of the ith meter quasilinear algorithm is equivalent in structure to the Kalman
filter algorithm for the input process in the form of ML-estimates of the vector of
informative parameters i (k). In contrast to the Kalman filter in the quasilinear algo-
rithm, the matrix C i (k) depends on the value of the vector of extrapolation estimates
of informative and non-informative parameters μ ˆ ei (k) and determines the estimate of
the instantaneous accuracy of the ML-estimate − → y i (k). Therefore, replacing Ri−1 (k)
with C i (k), all the algorithms obtained below will also be valid for quasilinear filtering
in meters.
We will further assume that the noise of the individual measurement channels
is uncorrelated with each other and with the state noise. Let us find the optimal
estimate of the state vector for this case and consider the possibility of calcu-
lating it in several ways. To do this, one can use the Kalman filtering Eqs. (6.57a)–
(6.57h), substituting the values of the variables of the ith channel into the variables
−
→y (k) = [− →y T1 (k), . . . , −
→
y Tm (k)]T ; H (k) = [H1T (k), . . . , HmT (k)]T ; R(k) = block
diag [R1 (k), . . . , Rm (k)].
After transformations, we get
m
ˆ
ρ(k) = ρˆ e (k) + P(k)HiT (k)Ri−1 (k)−
→
z i (k) (6.62a)
i=1
−
→
z i (k) = −
→
y i (k) − Hi (k)ρˆ e (k) (6.62b)
ρˆ e (k) = ˆ − 1) + (k − 1)−

(k, k − 1)ρ(k
→
ζ 0 (k − 1) (6.62c)
& m
'−1
P(k) = Pe−1 (k) + HiT (k)Ri−1 (k)Hi (k) (6.62d)
i=1
Pe (k) = (k, k − 1)P(k − 1) T

(k, k − 1) + (k − 1)Q(k − 1) T (k − 1).
(6.62e)
The block diagram of the multichannel filter, constructed in accordance with

expressions (6.62a–6.62e), is shown in Fig. 6.10 [150]. The optimal estimate in this
filter is obtained by simultaneous weight summing of the updating processes −
→ z i (k)
Fig. 6.10 Block diagram of a parallel multichannel filter with feedback on ρˆ e (k)
of all channels using a common extrapolator. The weighting coefficients are inversely
proportional to the variances of the noise measurements of each channel.
The implementation of a multichannel filter in accordance with this block diagram
is called parallel. However, it is not the only possible one. Optimal multichannel
filtering of the state vector −→
ρ (k) can also be carried out using other methods that
are equivalent from the point of view of the efficiency of the estimates obtained, but
differing in the required amount of computation and the method of using the input
data.
Referring to the structures of hardware integrated avionics, discussed in Chap. 4,
from the point of view of complex processing, these structures can be divided into
three options (Fig. 6.11). In the first variant (Fig. 6.11a), parallel (synchronous) signal
processing of m radio systems is performed using m DSPs. In each of them, after
the initial processing of signals, Kalman filtering is performed, the data of which is
fed into the general data processor (DP), where the overall assessment of the state
ˆ
vector ρ(k) and the covariance matrix P(k) are formed.
In the second variant (Fig. 6.11b), sequential (time division) signal processing is
performed for m radiosystems with one DSP with sequential data output in the DP.
For this purpose, the DSP input is connected in series with a period of m disks to the
system RF device and receives, with a period of m, selective values of signals from
each of the m radio systems. The third option (Fig. 6.11c) is mixed, during which
the signals of the m radio systems are processed sequentially in time by a group of
n DSPs (n < m).
The block diagram of the filter (Fig. 6.10) refers to the first option. In this case, the
weighted values of the updating processes K i (k)− →z i (k), the values of the matrices
Hi(k), Ri (k) and the values of the DP to each DSP must include the values of the
extrapolated estimate ρˆ e (k) and the covariance matrix P(k).
The presence of feedbacks from DP to DSP complicates the implementation of
a multichannel filter. Therefore, another modification of the parallel multichannel
filter [151] has been developed.
Ant. 1 DSP 1
System RF
…
…
device Switch DP
Ant. М
DSP М
(a) Parallel (synchronous) signal processing of M radio systems by M

DSP
Ant. 1
System RF
Switch DP
…
device
DSP
Ant. М
(b) Sequential (time-division) signal processing of M radio systems with

one DSP with serial data output to data processor
Ant. 1 DSP 1
System RF
Switch DP
…
device
Ant. М
DSP N
(c) Parallel-serial processing of signals of M radio systems by a group of N

processors DSP (N<M)
Fig. 6.11 Variants of signal processing and data of several radio systems
We transform Eqs. (6.57a)–(6.57h) and (6.62a–6.62e) so that, as a result, we

exclude the dependence of the general estimate on −
→
z i (k). From Eq. (6.57a)–(6.57h),
we get
ρˆ i (k) = ρˆ ei (k) + K i (k)[−

→
y i (k) − Hi (k)ρˆ i (k)]
= [I − K (k)H (k)]ρˆ (k) + K (k)−
i i ei
→y (k).
i i (6.63)
From (6.63) and (6.57g), we have
Hi (k)Ri−1 (k)−
→
y i (k) = Pi−1 (k)ρˆ i (k) − Pei−1 (k)ρˆ ei (k) (6.64)
By direct calculation, we get
K (k)−
→
y (k) = P(k)[H1T (k) . . . HmT (k)]block diag[R1−1 (k), . . . , Rm−1 (k)]
[−
→
y T (k), . . . , −
1
→
y T (k)]m
m
= P(k) HiT (k)Ri−1 (k)−
→
y i (k). (6.65)
i=1
Using (6.57a)–(6.57h), (6.63)–(6.65), we get

m
ρˆ (k) = P(k){Pe−1 (k)ρˆ e (k) + [Pi−1 (k)ρˆ i (k)−Pei−1 (k)ρˆ ei (k)]}, (6.66)
i=1
m
P −1 (k) = Pe−1 (k) + {Pi−1 (k) − Pei−1 (k)}. (6.67)
i=1
Equations (6.66) and (6.67) define a different structure for the exchange of data
between DSP and DP. For the formation of a general estimate of the state vector
and the covariance matrix P(k) from all the DSPs, local data ρˆ i (k), ρˆ ei (k), Pi−1 (k),
Pei−1 (k) is transmitted to the DP. The data processor needs only to remember the
matrices F(k), G(k), Q(k), and it does not need any other information, which by
default is passed to it by each of the DSPs through local estimates and covariances
associated with them. Signal processors produce local estimates only based on their
own measurements and do not need feedback from DP. Therefore, they can work
in concert, each with their own radio system, and can replace each other with the
possible failure of any of the DSP without changing links with the DP.
Another structure of a parallel multichannel filter can be obtained by first imple-
menting the “compression” of the input data in the DP [150]. Formally, this process
is described as follows:
m
ρˆ (k) = ρˆ e (k) + P(k)HiT (k)Ri−1 (k)[−
→
y i (k) − Hi (k)ρˆ e (k)]
i=1
( )
m
−
→
= ρˆ e (k) + P(k) HiT (k)Ri−1 (k)Hi (k) ρ (k)
i=1
( m
)−1
+ HiT (k)Ri−1 (k)Hi (k)
i=1
m
'
× HiT (k)Ri−1 (k)−
→
z i (k)−ρˆ e (k)
i=1
= ρˆ e (k) + P(k)
( m )
× HiT (k)Ri−1 (k)Hi (k) [−
→
y r (k) − ρˆ e (k)] (6.68)
i=1
−
→
where the resulting measurement vector −
→
y (k) = −
→
ρ (k) + ξ (k) is
( m
)−1 m
−
→
y r (k) = HiT (k)Ri−1 (k)Hi (k) HiT (k)Ri−1 (k)−
→
y i (k), (6.69)
i=1 i=1
−
→
ξ (k)—resultant measurement noise vector with zero mean and correlation matrix
( m
)−1
Rξ (k) = HiT (k)Ri−1 (k)Hi (k) (6.70)
i=1
For a wide class of practical problems, the matrix Rξ (k) may not exist and, instead
of it, it is necessary to use the laboriously calculated pseudo-inverse Moore–Penrose
matrix [152]. In addition, even in the case of the existence of the matrix Rξ (k), the
calculations that must be carried out in each DSP are rather complicated. Therefore,
we can offer another form of parallel filter with “compression” of the input data.
From (6.57h) and (6.64), we get
ρˆ (k) = ρˆ e (k) + P(k)Rξ−1 (k)[−

→
y p (k) − ρˆ e (k)], (6.71)
m
−
→
y r (k) = Rξ (k) [Pi−1 (k)ρˆ i (k) − Pei−1 (k)ρˆ ei (k)], (6.72)
i=1
P −1 (k) = Pe−1 (k) + Rξ−1 (k), (6.73)
−
→
where the resulting noise matrix ξ (k) is presented in another form:
m
Rξ−1 (k) = [Pi−1 (k) − Pei−1 (k)]. (6.74)
i=1
With the structure of a parallel filter with “compression” of the input data,
described by Formulas (6.71)–(6.74), the same data is transferred from each DSP
to the DP as in the case of the filter described by Formulas (6.66), (6.67) It is not
required to calculate vectors HiT (k)Ri−1 (k)−
→
z i (k) and matrices HiT (k)Ri−1 (k)Hi (k).
Let us proceed to the consideration of a multichannel filter with sequential
processing of data channels (Fig. 6.11b). For simplicity, consider the following
general model:
−
→ −
→ −
→
ρ (k) = ρ (k − 1) + ζ (k − 1), (6.75)
−
→
y (k) = H (k)−
→
ρ (k) + −
→
ν (k), (6.76)
in which it is considered that the signal processor at the time points {(jm + i), j
= 0, 1, 2, …} processes the signals of the ith radio system and generates estimates
of the state and covariance in the form
ρˆ i ( jm + i), ρˆ ei (( j + 1)m + i), Pi ( jm + i), Pei (( j = 1)m + i).
The corresponding general estimates of the condition and covariance are given
out of the DP as
ˆ jm + i), ρˆ e (( j + 1)m + i), P( jm + i), Pe (( j + 1)m + i).

ρ(
Further, the observation matrix H(k) is assumed to be periodic with the switch
switching period m, so the DSP observes the signals of the ith radio system at times
{(jm + i), j = 0, 1, 2, …} using the matrix observations H i (jm + i) = H i , which is
assumed to be independent of time. The covariance of the measurement noise {Ri , i
= 0, 1, 2, …} is also considered periodic.
The state space model for the signal processor when observing signals from the
ith system is as follows:
−
→ −
→
ρ (( j + 1)m + i) = m − →ρ ( jm + i) + ζ ∗ ( jm + i),
−
→y i ( jm + i) = Hi −
→
ρ ( jm + i) + −
→
ν i ( jm + i),
−
→ * k−
→
where ζ ∗ ( jm + i) = m−1 ζ ( jm + i − k),
∗
*m−1 k k=0
−
→
Q = k=0 Q kT
—noise correlation matrix ζ ∗ ( jm + i).
The extrapolation and filtering equations for the sequential transfer of data from
DSP to DP can be written as follows.
The extrapolation equations for observing the data of the ith system:
ρˆ ei (( j + 1)m + i) = m
ρˆ i ( jm + i);
Pei (( j + 1)m + i) = m
Pi ( jm + i) mT
+ Q∗.
Extrapolation equations for data processor:
ρˆ e (( jm + i + 1) = ˆ jm + i);
ρ(
Pe (( jm + i + 1) = P( jm + i) T
+ Q.
The filtering equations of the ith system data:
ρˆ i ( jm + i) = [I − K i ( jm + i)Hi ]ρˆ ei ( jm + i) + K i ( jm + i)−

→
y i ( jm + i);
(6.77)
K i ( jm + i) = Pi ( jm + i)HiT Ri−1 ;
Pi−1 ( jm + i) = Pei−1 ( jm + i) + HiT Ri−1 Hi . (6.78)
Filtering equations for the data processor:
ˆ jm + i) = [I − K ( jm + i)Hi ]ρˆ e ( jm + i) + K ( jm + i)−

ρ( →
y i ( jm + i); (6.79)
K ( jm + i) = P( jm + i)HiT Ri−1 ;
P −1 ( jm + i) = Pe−1 ( jm + i) + HiT Ri−1 Hi . (6.80)
Eliminating − →
yi ( jm + i) from (6.78)–(6.79) and combining (6.78) and (6.80), we
get the final formulas for the filtration equations:
ˆ jm + i) = P( jm + i)[P −1 ( jm + i)ρˆ e ( jm + i)
ρ( e
+ Pi−1 ( jm + i)ρˆ i ( jm + i) − Pei−1 ( jm + i)ρˆ ei ( jm + i)];

P −1 ( jm + i) = Pe−1 ( jm + i) + Pi−1 ( jm + i) − Pei−1 ( jm + i).
The results of the development of a filter structure for parallel and sequential
transmission of DSP measurement results to the DP can be combined for a structure
(Fig. 6.11c), which contains n signal processors for working with m > n radio systems.
The corresponding formulas with a somewhat different formulation of the problem
were obtained in [151].
6.5.2 Multichannel Quasilinear Estimation of Radio Data
Let, as before in Sect. 6.5.1, the equation of state for the navigation parameters has
the form
−
→ −
→
ρ (k) = (k, k − 1)−
→
ρ (k − 1) + (k − 1) ζ (k − 1), (6.19)
−
→ −
→
where the state noise ζ (k) has an average ζ 0 (k) and a covariance matrix Q(k).
The measurement equation of the ith meter is written in the form of a sequence of
→∗
− −
→

vectors (k) of the most plausible vector estimates (k) = h [−

i
→ρ (k)]:i i
∗
−
→

−
→
y i (k) = i (k) = h i [−
→
ρ (k)] + −
→
ν i (k), (6.81)
where − →ν i (k) is the measurement noise of the ith meter.

We will further assume that the noise of individual measurement channels is not
correlated with each other and with the state noise. Let us find the optimal estimate
of the state vector for this case and consider the possibility of calculating it in several
ways.
Formed, as in Sect. 6.5.1, composite vector of observation − →y (k) =
−
→ T −
→
[ y 1 (k), . . . , y m (k)] and matrices H (k) = [H1 (k), . . . , Hm (k)] ; R(k) =
T T T T T
blockdiag[R1 (k), . . . , Rm (k)]. After transformations similar to those in Sects. 6.2.6

and 6.5.1, we get
m
ˆ
ρ(k) = ρˆ e (k) + P(k)HiT (k)Ci (k)−
→
z i (k) (6.62a)
i=1
∗
−
→

−
→
z i (k) = i (k) − h i [ρˆ e (k)] (6.62b)
ρˆ e (k) = ˆ − 1) + (k − 1)−

(k, k − 1)ρ(k
→
ζ 0 (k − 1) (6.62c)
m
P(k) = [Pe−1 (k) + HiT (k)Ci−1 (k)Hi (k)]−1 (6.62d)
i=1
Pe (k) = (k, k − 1)P(k − 1) T

(k, k − 1) + (k − 1)Q(k − 1) T (k − 1).
(6.62e)
∂h ik [−
→
ρ]
where HiT (k)—matrix with elements ∂ρ j −
→
.
ρ =ρˆ e (k)
In another, more convenient form, the DP filtration equations have the same form
as for the case of multichannel linear filtration:
1 m
2
ˆρ (k) = P(k) P −1 (k)ρˆ e (k) + [Pi−1 (k)ρˆ i (k)−Pei−1 (k)ρˆ ei (k)] , (6.66)
e
i=1
m
P −1
(k) = Pe−1 (k) + {Pi−1 (k) − Pei−1 (k)}. (6.67)
i=1
where for a given, nonlinear, case, the estimates and covariance matrices of the ith
meter are:
→∗
−

ρˆ i (k) = ρˆ ei (k) + Pi (k)HiT (k)Ci (k){ i (k) − h i [ρˆ ei (k)]}

→∗
−

= ρˆ ei (k) + K i (k){ i (k) − h i [ρˆ ei (k)]}, (6.82)
ρˆ ei (k) = (k, k − 1)ρˆ i (k − 1), (6.83)
Pi−1 (k) = Pei−1 (k) + HiT (k)Ci (k)Hi (k). (6.84)
Pei (k) = (k, k − 1)Pi (k − 1) T

(k, k − 1) + (k − 1)Q(k − 1) T (k − 1),
(6.62f)
Equations (6.66) and (6.67) define the structure of data exchange between DSP
ˆ
and DP. To form a general estimate of the state vector ρ(k) and the covariance matrix
ˆ ˆ
P(k) from all the DSPs, the local data, ρ i (k), ρ ei (k), Pi−1 (k), Pei−1 (k), as in the
linear case, is transmitted to the DP. The data processor stores only the matrix F(k),
G(k), Q(k). Signal processors produce local estimates only on the basis of their own
measurements and do not need feedback from the DP.
The resulting division of computation between DSP and DP allows
1. when creating integrated equipment, to conduct an independent synthesis of
preprocessing algorithms or to use already existing, not necessarily optimal
algorithms;
2. to switch inputs DP from the DSP, which failed in the process, to another DSP
without disrupting the general structure of complex processing.
6.6 Application of Adaptive Estimation Methods for Navigation Data Processing 333
6.6 Application of Adaptive Estimation Methods

for Navigation Data Processing
6.6.1 Correlation Algorithms for Adaptive Estimation
The implementation of optimal complexing filters, which allow to ensure the potential
accuracy of measuring the navigation parameters, is not feasible in practice for the
following reasons:
• Usually it is not known the exact description of input processes in the observation
interval of a priori not given duration.
• The statistical characteristics of the measurement noise (the errors of the primary
meter or STM) are a priori unknown.
• Errors in measuring the coordinates of an aircraft using STM when recalculated
into a single basis with estimates obtained from autonomous means, substantially
depend on the relative position of the aircraft and the beacon.
• Implementation of complex filters of high dimensionality is not possible due to
the limited performance of DP.
For these reasons, the actual accuracy of complex gages using Kalman filter algo-
rithms is significantly lower than the potential accuracy calculated from covariance
equations. The phenomenon of a substantial increase in the real errors of the Kalman
filter as compared with the theoretical ones is known as the divergence of the filter
[58]. The same, by virtue of the considerations given in Sect. 6.2, can be said about
the linear filter in the quasilinear APM-estimation algorithm.
There are several approaches to preventing the divergence of a filter. The first
approach is based on the robust estimation theory. The second approach is to use
adaptive assessment methods. The third approach is that perturbations in the equa-
tions of state and measurement are considered non-defined with a priori given limits
of change. The problem of estimation in this formulation is solved by the methods
of minimax recurrent filtering.
Consider the use of adaptive estimation for building navigation data processing
algorithms. With regard to this problem, we analyze a number of correlation methods
described in [58]. Note that when measuring the coordinates of an aircraft with the
help of a radio beacon systems, it is of interest when an adaptation is required to
change the characteristics of both the state noise and the measurement noise. The
matrices and are known.
The correlation methods of adaptive estimation are based on the relationship
between the sample covariance matrix of a specially formed sequence of random
variables and unknown parameters of the system. The most common methods are
those in which the selective covariant matrix of the updating sequence is used.
m
P̂z (k) =
1 −
→
z (i)−
→
z T (i − k), (6.85)
m−k i=k
where m is the sample size.

Algorithmic covariance matrix of the updating sequence
Pz (k) = H (k)Pe (k)H T (k) + R(k). (6.86)
Estimates P̂z (k) are asymptotically unbiased, Gaussian and consistent. They are
used to verify the optimality of the filter transfer coefficient, which consists in
testing the hypothesis that the update sequence is uncorrelated, since the algorithmic
covariance matrix of the sequence − →
z (k) is zero.
To implement the algorithms, it is necessary for the filter to work in steady state.
Then the estimate P̂z of the form (6.85) will be sufficiently effective. When processing
data of beacon systems, this means that the stationarity intervals of input processes
must be at least one minute.
In a number of other algorithms, iterative adjustment of the transfer coefficients
K(k) is performed. In [58], it was shown that in the steady state of the filter, when
the filter transfer coefficient and the covariance matrices do not change with time,
the true covariance matrices of the updating processes are equal
Pz (0) = H P̃e H T + R, (6.87a)
Pz (k) = H [ ( − K̃ H )]k−1 [ P̃e H T − K̃ Pz (0)], k > 1. (6.87b)
Here P̃e is the covariance matrix of extrapolation errors at a suboptimal transfer

coefficient, satisfying the equation
P̃e = (I − K̃ H ) P̃e (I − K̃ H )T T
+ K̃ R K̃ T T
+ Q T , (6.88)
where Q and R are true covariance matrices of state and observation noise.
If the transfer coefficient satisfies the ratio
P̃e H T − K̃ Pz (0) = 0,
that is, the matrix K̃ is optimal, then Pz (k) = 0 for all k > 0. Based on (6.87a,
6.87b)–(6.88), it is possible to obtain estimates for the covariance matrices Q and R.
Algorithms based on (6.85)–(6.88) are very sensitive to errors in the estimates
of the elements of matrices P̂z (k). More robust algorithms are based on using to
calculate the transfer coefficient K of the properties of the covariance matrix
+ ,
P̃e∗ = [−̃
→ρ e (k) − ρˆ e (k)][−̃
→ρ e (k) − ρˆ e (k)]T ,
where −̃
→ρ e (k) is the suboptimal estimate of the filter extrapolation in the steady state.
The convergence of the iterative process and the stability of the matrix K are proved.
The considered algorithms do not sufficiently take into account the statistical
nature of the problem. Thus, errors in estimating covariance Pz (0) are not taken
into account. The best characteristics for estimating the unknown parameters of the
matrices Q and R are the algorithm that uses the weighted least squares method and
takes into account the presence of errors in all estimates P̂z (k). In this algorithm, the
matrices Q and R are represented as
l l
Q= ci Q i ; R = ci Ri , (6.89)
i=1 i=1
where Qi , Ri are known matrices, and ci are the components of the vector of unknown
parameters. Then, taking into account (6.89), the covariance of the updating sequence
is compiled, and the problem of minimizing it by the parameters ci is reduced to
solving a linear regression problem.
In general, the possibility of using the considered algorithms is difficult because
of the need for a significant increase in the number of calculations and the memory
capacity of the processor as compared to the non-adaptive algorithm (6.57a)–(6.57h).
There are also algorithms for separate estimation of averages and covariance
matrices of updating sequences, given, for example, in [60]. To use them, it is neces-
sary to have a mathematical model for changing the mean values and covariance
noise matrices, as well as their initial values, which is a drawback of the algorithms.
However, based on them, a simple adaptive algorithm has been proposed that provides
the estimation of the filter transmission coefficient [32].
From relations (6.61), it follows that for constant matrices , , and H, the value
of K depends only on the matrices Q and C −1 . Changing Q and C −1 causes a change
in the correlation matrix of the renewing sequence.
→
z (k) − m z (k)][−
D(k) = [− →
z (k) − m z (k)]T .
Indeed, from equality it follows that for an ideal filter operation D(k) =
H (k)Pe (k)H T (k) + C −1 (k), and the filter transmission coefficient is equal to
K (k) = Pe (k)H T (k)D −1 (k). (6.90)
This implies the possibility of using the estimate of the correlation matrix of
the updating sequence at each measurement step with the known matrix Q(k) to
determine the estimate of the filter transmission coefficient K̂ (k).
For simplicity, let us consider the one-dimensional problem of constructing an
adaptive filter with complex secondary data processing of a radiotechnical meter
and an autonomous non-radiotechnical meter. Due to the significant difference in the
error spectra of the meters, it is possible to divide the discrepancy of the complex filter
with the help of special measuring algorithms into two components—low-frequency
d̂ L (t), due to the errors of the autonomous meter, and high frequency, due to the
errors of radio data. The component d̂ L (t) is accepted as an estimate of mz (t), the
dispersion d̂ H (t) of the high-frequency component is taken as an estimate D̂(t). The

component d̂ L (t) can be distinguished by passing z(t) through a first-order dynamic
link with a large time constant T 1 :
1 1
ḋˆL (t) = − d̂ L (t) + z(t). (6.91)
T1 T1
The variance estimate d̂ H (t) is calculated by averaging the square of the centered
update process while passing it through a similar dynamic link with a small time
constant T 2 :
1 1
ḋˆH (t) = − d̂ H (t) + [z(t) − d̂ L (t)]2 . (6.92)
T2 T2
The time constants T 1 and T 2 are selected, on the one hand, from the conditions
for obtaining high-quality smoothing of estimates d̂ L (t) and d̂ H (t), on the other hand,
from the condition for reducing the delays in estimates made by dynamic links.
In discrete form, Eqs. (6.91) and (6.92) are
d̂ L (k + 1) = l1 d̂ L (k) + (1 − l1 )z(k), (6.93a)
d̂ H (k + 1) = l2 d̂ H (k) + (1 − l2 )[z(k) − d̂ L (k)]2 , (6.93b)
where l1 = exp(−t/T1 ); l2 = exp(−t/T2 ).

The results of the analysis of the errors in measuring the radio navigation param-
eters show that the matrix Q and C −1 change insignificantly over the time between
adjacent measurements. Consequently, in the steady state filter, the correlations,
Pe (k + 1) ≈ Pe (k), P(k + 1) ≈ P(k), K(k + 1) ≈ K(k), and from Eqs. (6.61) and
(6.90) are performed for a given Q one can obtain the dependence K = K(D). When
implementing an adaptive algorithm, the dependency is used as the filter transmission
coefficient K̂ = K̂ ( D̂), where D̂ is expressed by Formula (6.93b). This nonlinear
dependence allows the algorithm to be applied with relatively large deviations of the
actual statistical characteristics of radio data from the true values of the parameters.
Let us consider, for example, an adaptive algorithm for complex information
processing of the avionics of the landing system (LS) and INS based on the relations
(6.90)–(6.93a, 6.93b) [32]. We will assume that data on course C∗ and glide G∗
deviations from the landing trajectory, the range R* to the retranslator, and the baro-
inertial complex—information on the x, y coordinates and H flight height in the
coordinate system of the take-off landing strip (runway).
An isolated INS channel for one of the coordinates, for example, x, will be
described by a system of equations
dVX (t)
VX (t) = VX T (t) + VX (t); = a VX (t) + n(t), (6.94)
dt
where V XT (t) is the true value of the rate of change of the coordinate x(t); V X (t) is the
measured speed value obtained from the INS; V X (t) is the error of measuring the
INS velocity; n(t) is white noise; a = −1/T; T is the gyroscope drift time constant.
The state vector is formed from the x coordinate and the error V X . The process
of changing the state vector during the time t between two adjacent measurements
of the LS signals for the x coordinate in discrete time is written as follows:

x(k + 1) 1 (1 − m 1 )/a x(k) (1 + at − m 1 /a 2
= · + · VX (k)
VX (k + 1) 0 m1 Vx (k) 0
,
0
+ · gC (k)
−(1 − m 1 )/a
(6.95)
where gC (k) is the noise of the INS state; m 1 = exp(at).

After the measurements are recalculated C∗ , G∗ and R* from the coordinate
system of the joint venture to the coordinate system of the runway, the equation for
measuring the coordinate x by the signals of the joint venture is
(6.96)
where x̂ ∗ (k) is the estimate of the x(k) coordinate obtained from the LS; gL (k)—noise
measurement LS.
For Eqs. (6.95) and (6.96), the relations describing the adaptive filter are

x̂e (k + 1) 1 (1 − m 1 )/a x̂(k) VX (k)k
= · + ,
V̂X e (k + 1) 0 m1 V̂x (k) 0

x̂(k) x̂e (k) K X (k)
= + · z(k),
V̂X (k) V̂xe (k) K V X (k)
z(k) = x̂ ∗ (k) − x̂e (k);

3 3
K X (k) = (A + B/ d̂ H (k))t; K V X (k) = −0.5(A + B/ d̂ H (k))2 t; (6.97)
where d̂ H (k) is determined by Eq. (6.93b), and the values of m1 and a are defined in
(6.94), (6.95).
Formula (6.97) are obtained by approximating the dependence K = K(D) for real
INSs.
The implementation of the above algorithm significantly increases the reliability
of ensuring the landing of the aircraft. To eliminate abnormal measurement errors
of the LS, a correction control unit was introduced into the algorithm, in which the
comparison |z(k)| is with a threshold.
When entering the zone of action of the joint venture, there may be significant
accumulated errors in the calculation of the coordinates of the aircraft. Taking into
account that the values of the filter transfer coefficients are determined for steady
state operation, the change in the errors accumulated from the LS measurements is
necessary to be carried out by special methods before entering the adaptation mode.
Such methods can be reducing errors at a constant speed or for a specified time. In
both cases, provided that the received radio data is reliable, the numerical coordinates
can be corrected by linear suboptimal filters of the first order.
When |z(k)| will become less than the threshold value, an adaptive complex
processing algorithm is implemented, containing the following operations:
1. recalculation of coordinates from the coordinate system of the runway into the
coordinate system of LS;
2. calculation of residuals (updating processes) in the coordinate system of the LS;
3. recalculation of residuals from the coordinate system of the LS into the
coordinate system of the runway;
4. calculation of averages and MSE of residuals;
5. the calculation of filter transmission coefficients;
6. the calculation of the coordinates of aircraft;
7. the calculation of estimates of the errors in measuring the speed of change of
the coordinates of the aircraft;
8. calculation of extrapolated estimates of aircraft coordinates.
We present the results of the simulation of the flight algorithm of the aircraft along
a landing trajectory from a distance of 7 km to a distance of 500 m from the glide
path beacon. At the filter inputs, the noise characteristics of the measurement were
equal to σ R = 50 m; σC = 0.1◦ ; σG = 0.02◦ . At the outputs of the filter, the error
of the estimates σ R , σK , σ had values of 4 m, 0.013° and 0.007°, respectively.
From the simulation results, it follows that when an adaptive complex filter is used,
the errors are significantly reduced and the larger, the greater the measurement noise
at the filter input.
6.6.2 Adaptive Algorithm for Multichannel Linear

Estimation with “Compression” of Residuals
Considered in Sect. 6.5.1 multichannel estimation algorithms are based on the

Kalman filter theory. This means that they will give an optimal estimate of the state
vector in the sense of the minimum of the mean square error only in the case of a
precise a priori knowledge of the system dynamics and the statistical characteristics
of measurement noise. Otherwise, it is possible to increase the estimation errors up
to the expenditure of the filter. To improve the estimation of the state vector of an
aircraft under conditions of a priori uncertainty in the synthesis of a multichannel
filter, it is advisable to use the approach to constructing adaptive filters described in
Sect. 6.6.1.
We modify the most economically computationally efficient multichannel esti-

mation algorithm with compression of measurements in such a way that an adaptive
filter can be constructed on its basis. Transforming the expression (6.62a), we get
m
ˆ
ρ(k) = ρˆ e (k) + P(k)HiT (k)Ri−1 (k)−
→
z i (k)
i=1
& m
'
= ρˆ e (k) + P(k) HiT (k)Ri−1 (k)Hi (k)
i=1
⎧& '−1 ⎫
⎨ m m ⎬
HiT (k)Ri−1 (k)Hi (k) HiT (k)Ri−1 (k)−
→
z i (k) .
⎩ ⎭
i=1 i=1
Let us call the expression in braces previously “compressed” residual and denote
it
& m
'−1 m
−
→
z COMP (k) = HiT (k)Ri−1 (k)Hi (k) HiT (k)Ri−1 (k)−
→
z i (k). (6.98)
i=1 i=1
Given the expression for the correlation matrix of the resulting measurement noise
vector
( m
)−1
Rξ (k) = HiT (k)Ri−1 (k)Hi (k) ,
i=1
will get
ˆ
ρ(k) = ρˆ e (k) + K (k)−
→
z COMP (k), (6.99)
where for known matrices Ri (k) the transfer coefficient of the filter K(k) is calculated
by the formula
K (k) = P(k)Rξ−1 (k). (6.100)
With an inaccurate prior setting of the system dynamics and statistical charac-
teristics of the measurement noise, the transfer coefficients of the filter K(k) can
be calculated in real time based on the properties of the “compressed” residual in
accordance with the formulas of clause 6.6.1. Values d̂ L (k) and d̂ H (k) are determined
from the ratios
d̂ L (k + 1) = l1 d̂ L (k) + (1 − l1 )z COMP (k),

d̂ H (k + 1) = l2 d̂ H (k) + (1 − l2 )[z COMP (k) − d̂ L (k)]2 ,
transfer coefficients in the example of Sect. 6.6.1—by Formula (6.97).

The advantages of the proposed multichannel filter with “compression” of resid-
uals should be attributed primarily to the use of all available information about the
state vector of the aircraft. Another advantage of this algorithm in comparison with
the algorithm with “compression” of measurements is the simplicity of protection
against anomalous emissions in measurements. Indeed, in the structure with “com-
pression” of residuals, residuals are calculated for all channels of the integrated
avionics, which in each channel can be easily compared with the threshold values
specified for this channel. If the absolute value of the residual exceeds the threshold,
then the measurement in this channel is considered anomalous and discarded. At the
same time, information received through other channels is retained without distor-
tion (see Sect. 6.7 below). In the structure with “compression” of measurements,
only one discrepancy is calculated between the parameter forecast and the “com-
pressed” measurement. In case it goes beyond the specified limit, the “compressed”
measurement will be discarded, i.e., measurements of channels that do not contain
anomalous errors will be used.
When implemented in an airborne data processor of the algorithm with “com-
pression” of residuals, difficulties arise associated with different data acquisition
rates from various radiotechnical sensors. Let at the moment of time t k in DP flow
measurements only from systems with numbers from 1 to n (n < m). The absence of k
measurements in channels n + 1, …, m at step corresponds to the infinite dispersion
of measurements in these channels. Consequently,
−1 −1
Rn+1 = Rn+2 = · · · = Rm−1 = 0. (6.101)
Then from (6.98) and (6.101), we get

& n
'−1 n
−
→
z COMP (k) = HiT (k)Ri−1 (k)Hi (k) HiT (k)Ri−1 (k)−
→
z i (k),
i=1 i=1
( n
)−1
Rξ (k) = HiT (k)Ri−1 (k)Hi (k) . (6.102)
i=1
With a different set of channels that simultaneously submit information to the DP,
the expressions for the “compressed” residual and its correlation matrix will contain
summation over other indices i. This circumstance can be interpreted as a change
in the structure of a multichannel filter depending on the availability of information
in the measurement channels. If there is a large difference in the noise variances of
the measurement, the variance of the “compressed” residual and, consequently, the
optimal filter transfer coefficient can vary significantly in the adjacent steps of the
algorithm.
On the other hand, the suboptimal adaptive filter transfer coefficient, which is
calculated in real time based on the analysis of the properties of the “compressed”
discrepancy, is not able to adequately respond to changes in the structure of the
multichannel filter occurring at the adjacent steps of the algorithm. This is explained
by the fact that in the adaptive filter the magnitudes d̂ L (k) and d̂ H (k), included in the
expression for the transfer coefficient, are calculated by passing the residual through
discrete analogs of inertial links, having time constants significantly exceeding the
time resolution of the calculations in DP.
A way out of the current situation can be either the construction of an adaptive
algorithm containing the number of adaptive contours for calculating transfer coef-
ficients equal to the number of possible combinations of simultaneously operating
channels, or the organization of a computational cycle in DP with a rate equal to
the rate of data receipt from “slow” system. In this case, measurements from other
systems obtained for the interval between computation cycles should be averaged.
The first method of constructing an algorithm leads to a significant increase in
computational costs associated with the introduction of a large number of new blocks
for calculating transfer coefficients into the algorithm. The second method is much
simpler to implement, but the direct averaging * of measurements of a more “fast”
sensor is according to the formula y F = L1 Lj=1 y Fj , where y Fj is the measurement
of the “fast” system, y Fj is the averaged measurement of the “fast” system, L is the
number of measurements of the “fast” system time interval, and t M is possible only
under the condition
3
vζ t M RζF
Here RζF is the dispersion of the measurement by the “fast” coordinate system ς
of the aircraft, vς is the projection of the speed of the aircraft on the axis ς.
To eliminate the delay in the filtering algorithm, the value y Fj can be calculated as
an estimate extrapolated at the time of receipt of information from the “slow” system.
Extrapolation can be carried out, for example, by the method of least squares.
6.7 Multichannel Processing of Radio Data with Possible

Failures in the Measurement Channels
6.7.1 Task Setting
When synthesizing time series processing algorithms, including radio data, it is

traditionally assumed that the statistical properties of the observed series or the
properties of the generating mechanism retain a certain constancy over time or slowly
change. At the same time, many practical tasks are reduced to the sequential (i.e., at
the rate of arrival of regular observations) detection of a jump-like change (disorder)
of the properties of the observed time series occurring at an unknown point in time
[153].
For the first time, such a problem was considered by M. Girshik, G. Rubin and
E. S. Page for an independent Gaussian sequence and for detecting changes in the
mathematical expectation of an observable random variable. Then, in a whole series
of works by E. S. Page, K. Camp, A. N. Shiryaev, and others, optimal and subop-
timal algorithms were developed (in the sense of minimizing the average latency in
detecting disorder at a given level of false alarms), studies of their properties.
From the point of view of practice, there are two main types of problems that can
be solved using disorder detection algorithms. In the first case, it is necessary to detect
the disorder as soon as possible after its occurrence at a given level of false alarms, but
it is not required to indicate precisely the point in time when the disorder occurred.
This task, which, according to A. N. Shiryaev, is called “the task of early detection
of frustration,” often arises during the current quality control of continuous products,
in radiolocation and underwater acoustics upon detection of enemy objects, etc. In
airborne avionics, it can be essential, for example, when detecting the moments of
non-friend use of weapons, when detecting equipment failures at the aircraft landing
stage, etc. An increase in the delay in detecting a failure during the landing stage can
lead to a plane crash, and an increase in the frequency of false alarms can lead to the
subsequent unjustified removal from the aircraft of the operational equipment.
The second main type of problems solved by the methods of detecting a disorder
is reduced to the most accurate estimation of the moment of the appearance of the
disorder after the collection and processing of the final sample of observations. In
some cases, the very fact of the presence of a disorder within the analyzed sample is
unknown, and the verification of its presence is also a matter of decision.
Algorithms for solving problems of the first type are called sequential, and prob-
lems of the second type are called a posteriori. In a number of problems, the algo-
rithms of both types are used together, since in critical real-time applications, it is
necessary to both detect the disorder and accurately estimate its momentum [153].
When processing information in the avionics can be divided into two groups
of tasks that require the detection of a disorder, in the tasks of the first group, it
is necessary to detect sharp changes in the state model of the observed dynamic
system (e.g., maneuvering targets) or changes in the statistical characteristics of
the received signals, which lead to a change in the observation model to which the
work. Such a procedure may be necessary in detecting, distinguishing, resolving
signals, classifying data on objects, recognizing patterns, when a possible change in
properties is an integral part of a signal model or system.
In the tasks of the second group, it is required to detect and localize (eliminate,
isolate) failures and equipment and software failures by the output information of
the sensors. This function is assigned to the avionics control system.
When solving the problems of the first group, sequential methods are used, since
the detection of the disorder must be performed during the flight of the aircraft
in real time. When solving problems of the second group, both sequential and a
posteriori methods can be used, since the monitoring can be performed both in the
operating mode and at separate allocated time intervals. To solve these problems,
various methods of mathematical statistics are applicable.
6.7 Multichannel Processing of Radio Data with Possible … 343
The greatest difficulty lies in the fact that in monitoring by observations it is

necessary to separate the disorder caused by failures and faults of equipment from
changes in the statistical properties of the input processes. In case of equipment
failures, a decision should be made to switch to the use of other, genuine equipment
(if it is on board the aircraft). With drastic changes in the characteristics of input
processes, it is possible to take various decisions. If the sensor’s data is clogged with
short, abrupt, but rare outliers that make up a small percentage of all observations,
then in such a situation, you can smooth the data with adaptive methods or methods
that are resistant to outliers, and not try to detect a discrepancy in the sensor and
switch to another sensor. Another way is to detect and evaluate the nature of this
disorder and switch to another branch of the algorithm in the same sensor, which can
also be considered as an adaptation procedure.
As a rule, without additional information, a sensor failure by observations can be
detected only if the statistical characteristics of its output signal during normal oper-
ation differ significantly from the statistical characteristics at failure. For example,
the sensor begins to produce a constant number when it is known a priori about the
change in input signals (constant fault).
Separating sensor failures from changing (even abrupt) statistical characteristics
of input processes allows information redundancy. One of the ways is to make a
decision by the system to control a failure based on the analysis of both the char-
acteristics of the observation process data of input processes and the signals of the
airborne equipment built-in control system. Another way is to make decisions based
on functional integration—measuring the same parameters by several sensors and
jointly processing measurement results. Both the first and second paths are widely
used in complex technical systems and, in particular, in airborne avionics. The first
path took shape in the direction of fault detection and isolation (FDI) [154]. The
second way in foreign literature develops as a decision-making direction based on
multisensory data fusion (MSDF) [90–92].
Sequential methods of detecting disorder are divided into parametric and nonpara-
metric (when the moment of change of the distribution function of observations is
detected without a parametric assignment of this function). The most common are
parametric methods, which are classified, for example, according to the following
features [153]:
• whether or not information is used on the distribution of the moment of the
appearance of a discord;
• dimension of the parameter vector;
• whether knowledge of the value of the parameter vector is required after the
breakdown;
• whether the sequence of observations is independent.
• The main sequential parametric methods are divided into two groups [155]:
• multi-model methods;
• methods of generalized likelihood ratio.
Multi-model methods are based on the assumption that the dynamics of a real
system (a pair of state and observation equations) satisfies one of the N linear
stochastic models with known transition matrices, state noise and observation
matrices and displacement vectors. In this case, the decision to change the prop-
erties is based on the task of testing N hypotheses, and the implementation of the
algorithm in the simplest case is reduced to making a bank of N Kalman filters,
each of which is constructed on the basis of one of the N possible models. There are
numerous and detailed studies of these methods, their advantages, disadvantages,
modifications when solving various problems of detecting changes [155].
Among the methods of generalized likelihood ratios, cumulative sum algorithms
(CSA) [153, 156] are of the greatest practical and theoretical interest. In the simplest
case, the CSA is a reusable sequential criterion for the ratio of probabilities for two
simple hypotheses H 1 (no disorder): = 1 and H 2 (there is disorder): = 2 ,
where is the scalar parameter of the probability distribution density observations.
Further, Sect. 6.7 provides solutions to the problems of changes detecting in
the parameters of a dynamic system, obtained by multi-model methods of Yu. P.
Grishin and A. I. Vovk in [150, 157–160]. The choice of this material for this book is
dictated by that the initial formulation of the tasks is the most characteristic for radio
navigation, and the obtained algorithms were simulated in relation to the processing
of navigation information and were implemented in a specific avionics.
6.7.2 Single-Channel Estimation of Navigation Parameters

When Measurement Noise Changes Abruptly
Consider a general solution of the estimation problem in a dynamic system with the
equation of state
−
→ −
→
ρ (k) = (k, k − 1)−
→
ρ (k − 1) + ζ (k − 1), (6.103)
and the equation of observation

−
→
y (k) = h[−
→
ρ (k), −
→
γ (k), −
→
v (k)], (6.104)
−
→
where −→ρ (k) is the state vector; F(k, k − 1)—transitional matrix; ζ (k)—random
vector of Gaussian perturbation noise with zero mean and correlation matrix Q(k);
−
→y (k)—vector of measurements; − →v (k)—vector of Gaussian measurement noise
with zero mean and correlation matrix R(k); −→γ (k)—random unknown time-varying
vector of parameters characterizing the current state of the measuring system [150].
We assume that the values of the vector −
→
γ (k) belong to a finite set of RN containing
N elements:
R N = {−
→
γ : γ = γi ; i = 1, . . . , N },
and the sequence −

→
γ (k) forms in time a Markov chain with a known transition
probability matrix
Pi j = P[−
→
γ (k) = −
→
γ i |−
→
γ (k − 1) = −
→
γ j]
from the state −

→γ j at the moment of time k − 1 to the state −→γ i at the next kth
moment.
ˆ
The task of assessment is to obtain an optimal assessment of the state ρ(k) vector
from observations
−
→k
Y 1 = {−
→
y (k), −
→
y (k − 1), . . . , −
→
y (1)},
which meets the criterion of the minimum rms error. This criterion, as is known
[68], leads to estimates in the form of the posterior mean
−
→
ˆ
ρ(k) = E[−
→
ρ (k)| Y k1 ].
The quality of estimates is determined by the a posteriori correlation matrix of

estimation errors.
T −
→
P(k) = E{[−
→ ˆ
ρ (k) − ρ(k)][ −
→ ˆ
ρ (k) − ρ(k)] | Y k1 }
In the process of estimating the state vector, it is necessary to evaluate the random
vector of parameters −→
γ (k), which means the identification of the state of the dynamic
system at the current time.
We denote the event, which consists in the fact that at the kth step, the vector − →γ
−
→ −
→ −
→
takes the value γ i , by i (k), i.e., i (k) = { γ (k) = γ i }, i = 1, …, N. Then the
matrix of transition probabilities of a homogeneous Markov chain can be written as
follows:

Pi j = P i (k)| j (k − 1) .
Denote a specific implementation of the sequence of values −

→
γ (k), starting with
the first step, as i (k), i.e.,
i (k) = {ik (k), ik−1 (k − 1), . . . , i1 (1)}

$→
= − γ (k) = − →γ ik , −
→
γ (k − 1) = − →γ ik−1 , . . . , −
→
γ (1) = −
→
γ i1
where ik , ik − 1 , i1 ∈ I = {i: i = 1, …, N} is a sequence of indices belonging to the set

I, consisting of N elements. Each index determines the number of the state in which
the measuring system is currently located.
The entered sequence can be written through the subsequences that make it up:
$
i (k) = i (k), j (k − 1)
$→
= −
γ (k) = −
→
γ i, −
→
γ (k − 1) = −
→
γ jk−1 , . . . , −
→
γ (1) = −
→
γ j1 ,
$
j (k − 1) = j (k − 1), l (k − 2)
$→
= −γ (k − 1) = −→ γ ,−→
γ (k − 2) = −
j
→
γ lk−2 , . . . ,
−
→
γ (1) = −
→
γ l1 etc.,
where all indices belong to the set I.

To determine all possible implementations of the parameter − →
γ (k) vector from
the start of observations up to the current time, “k” inclusively, you must specify
i (k) for all sets a sequence of indices {ik , ik −1 , …, i1 }, the total number of such
implementations being N k . With increasing “k,” the number of implementations
−
→γ (k) is infinitely growing. Denote the space of these realizations containing N k
elements by k .
The optimal rating is [150]
ˆ −
→
ρ(k) = xˆ i (k)P( i (k)| Y k1 ), (6.105)
i∈N k
where ρˆ i (k) is the partial optimal estimate of the state vector, obtained for a
specific implementation of the sequence i (k) and equal by definition; ρˆ i (k) =
−
→ −
→
E[− →ρ (k)| Y k1 , i (k)]; P( i (k)| Y k1 )—a posteriori probability of this implementa-
tion.
Thus, the optimal estimate of the state vector of the dynamic system described by
the equations of state and observation (6.103) and (6.104) is formed as a weighted
sum of partial estimates obtained for each implementation of a sequence of values
of the parameters vector − →γ (k), and the coefficients are a posteriori probabilities
these implementations. Since the number of implementations increases exponentially
i (k) over time, an optimal estimation device requires an infinitely growing memory
capacity and, therefore, is generally unrealizable.
Issues related to the implementation of the evaluation device will be discussed
later.
A posteriori probabilities of realizations included in Formula (6.105) can be
calculated in a recurrent manner [150]:
−
→
−
→ f [−
→
y (k)| i (k), Y k−1
1 ]Pi j
P[ i (k)| Y k1 ] = * −
→k−1 −
→k−1
−
→
n∈k f [ y (k)| n (k), Y 1 ]P[ k (k)| Y 1 ]
−
→
× P[ i (k − 1)| Y k−1
1 ], (6.106)
−
→
where f [−
→ y (k)| i (k), Y k−1
1 ] is the conditional density of the probability distribution
of measurements − → y (k), calculated for the optimal estimation device, consistent with
the specific implementation of the parametric process i (k).
−
→
Formula (6.106) relates the values of a posteriori probabilities P[ i (k)| Y k1 ] at
this step with their values at the previous step, taking into account the characteristics
of the Markov chain and the results of current measurements.
The correlation error matrix of the optimal estimation of P(k) is equal to
−
→
P(k) = P[ n (k)| Y k1 ]{P(k, n (k)) + [ρˆ n (k) − ρ(k)][
ˆ ρˆ n (k) − ρ(k)]
ˆ T
},
n∈k
(6.107)
−
→
where P(k, n (k)) = E{[− ρ (k)− ρˆ n (k)][−
→ →
x (k)− ρˆ n (k)]T | Y k1 , n (k)}—a posteriori
correlation matrix of errors of private evaluation ρˆ n (k).
Suboptimal realizable estimation algorithms in the presence of failures in the
observation channel in particular, are given in [150, 161–164] for two types of linear
equation of observation:
−
→
y (k) = H (k)−
→
ρ (k) + γ (k)−
→
v (k), (6.108)
where γ (k) is a random variable taking values: γ (k) = 1 (normal mode) and γ (k) =
σ 1 (anomalous measurement mode in the presence of channel failures), H(k)—
observation matrix;
−
→
y (k) = γ (k)H (k)−
→
ρ (k) + −
→
v (k), (6.109)
where γ (k) is a random variable that takes two values: γ (k) = 1 (normal mode of
operation) and γ (k) = 0 (failure mode caused by the disappearance of the signal).
We present the main results obtained without conclusions.
1. Let in the equation of observations (6.108) γ (k) be an unknown, but constant
during the observation interval, random variable equal to 1 with a known
probability q and equal to σ with a probability of 1 − q.
The total number of possible implementations of the sequence of values of γ (k)
in this case is two (either all the values of γ (k) = 1 or γ (k) = σ ), and the optimal
estimation algorithm has the form:
ˆ −
→ −
→
ρ(k) = ρˆ 1 (k)P(γ = 1| Y k1 ) + ρˆ σ (k)P(γ = σ | Y k1 ),
−
→ −
→
where P(γ = σ | Y k1 ) = 1 − P(γ = 1| Y k1 ), and partial optimal estimates are
calculated by the recurrence relations of the Kalman filter:
ρˆ 1 (k) = (k, k − 1)ρˆ 1 (k − 1) + P1 (k)H T (k)R −1 (k)z̃ 1 (k|k − 1),

ρˆ σ (k) = (k, k − 1)ρˆ σ (k − 1) + Pσ (k)H T (k)[σ 2 R(k)]−1 z̃ σ (k|k − 1),
where z̃ 1 (k|k − 1), z̃ σ (k|k − 1) are the updating processes calculated by the formulas:
z̃ 1 (k|k − 1) = −
→
y (k) − H (k)ρˆ 1e (k),
z̃ (k|k − 1) = −
σ
→y (k) − H (k)ρˆ (k).
σe
The weighting factor is expressed by the recurrent formula
−
→ & −
→ '−1
−
→k 1 )
P(γ = 1| Y k−1 1 )
P(γ = 1| Y k−1
P(γ = 1| Y 1 ) = (k) −
→ × 1+ −
→ (k) ,
P(γ = σ | Y k−1
1 ) P(γ = σ | Y k−1
1 )
−
→
f [−
→y (k)|γ =1, Y k−1
1 ]
with the initial condition P[γ = 1|y(1)] = q, where (k) = −
→ −
→ ,
f [ y (k)|γ =σ, Y k−1 ]
1
where is the likelihood ratio, which, taking into account the Gaussianity of the like-
−
→
lihood functions, f [−
→y (k)|γ = i, Y k−11 ], i = 1, σ, can be calculated recurrently
through the updating processes z̃ 1 (k), z̃ σ (k) and their correlation matrices.
2. Suppose in the observation Eq. (6.109) γ (k) is an unknown constant during the
observation interval, a value equal to 1 with a known probability q and 0 with
probability 1 − q.
The optimal estimation algorithm is
ˆ −
→ −
→
ρ(k) = ρˆ 1 (k)P(γ = 1| Y k1 ) + ρˆ 0 (k)P(γ = 0| Y k1 ),
−
→ −
→
where P(γ = 0| Y k1 ) = 1 − P(γ = 1| Y k1 );
ρˆ 1 (k) = (k, k − 1)ρˆ 1 (k − 1) + P1 (k)H T (k)R −1 (k)z̃ 1 (k|k − 1),

ρˆ 0 (k) =(k, k − 1)ρˆ 0 (k − 1),
−
→ & −
→k−1 '−1
−
→k P(γ = 1| Y k−1 ) P(γ = 1| Y )
P(γ = 1| Y 1 ) = (k) −
→
1
× 1+ →k−1 (k)
−
1
,
P(γ = 0| Y k−11 ) P(γ = 0| Y 1 )
where (k) is the likelihood ratio.

3. Suppose in the observation Eq. (6.108) γ (k) is a random variable independent
at each step, equal to 1 with a known probability q(k) and equal to σ with
probability 1 − q(k).
In this case, the suboptimal estimation algorithm can be obtained under the
assumption that the probability distribution density of the extrapolation estimates
is Gaussian with the mean vector ρˆ e (k) and the correlation matrix Pe (k):
−
→
f [−
→ ˆ
1 ] = N {ρ e (k), Pe (k)},
ρ (k)| Y k−1
where N {−
→
a , P} is the Gaussian density of the probability distribution of the vectors
of random variables with the mean vector and the correlation matrix R.
The suboptimal estimation algorithm has the form:
ˆ
ρ(k) = ρˆ e (k) + p( 1|k)K 1 (k)z̃( k|k − 1) + [1 − p( 1|k)]K σ (k)z̃( k|k − 1),
(6.110)
where the matrix filter gains are expressed by the formulas
K i (k) = Pe (k)H T (k)[H (k)Pe (k)H T (k) + i 2 R(k)]−1 , i = 1, σ,

z̃(k|k − 1) = − →
y (k) − H (k)ρ̂ (k)
e
• general updating process for private assessments,
f 1 (k)q(k)
p(1|k) =
f 1 (k)q(k) + f σ (k)[1 − q(k)]
• the probability that at the kth instant of time the measurement channel is in good
condition.
−
→
f i (k) = f [−
→
y (k)|γ (k) = i, Y k−1
1 ]
−
→
= N {H (k) ρ e (k), H (k)Pe (k)H T (k) + i 2 R(k)} i = 1, σ.
The structure of the algorithm differs from the Kalman filter by the presence of
a multiplier p(1|k) in front of the matrix gain. When p(1|k) = 1, this algorithm
coincides with the Kalman one; when p(1|k) = 0, it degenerates into an extrapolator
(as when σ 1, K σ (k) → 0).
The extrapolation estimate ρˆ e (k) and the correlation matrix of extrapolation errors
Pe (k) are calculated using the usual Kalman filter formulas.
The correlation matrix of filtering errors is
P(k) = Pe (k) − p(1|k)K σ (k)H (k)Pe (k)

P(k) = Pe (k){I − p(1|k)[K 1 (k) − K σ (k)]H (k) − K σ (k)H (k)
4. Suppose in the equation of observations (6.109) γ (k) is the uncertainty of a

random variable at each step equal to 1 with a known probability q(k) and equal
to 0 with a probability 1 − q(k).
The suboptimal estimation algorithm has the form
ˆ
ρ(k) = ρˆ e (k) + p(1|k)K 1 (k)z̃(k|k − 1),
ρˆ e (k) = ˆ − 1);
(k, k − 1)ρ(k
f 1 (k)q(k)
p(1|k) =
f 1 (k)q(k) + f 0 (k)[1 − q(k)]
−
→
f i (k) = f [−
→
y (k)|γ (k) = i, Y k−1
1 ]
= N {i H (k)ρˆ e (k), i H (k)Pe (k)H T (k) + R(k)}, i = 1, 0,
Pe (k) = (k, k − 1)P(k − 1) T

(k, k − 1) + Q(k − 1),
P(k) = Pe (k) − p(1|k)K 1 (k)H (k)Pe (k);
K 1 (k) = Pe (k)H T (k)[H (k)Pe (k)H T (k) + R(k)]−1 .
5. Suppose in the observation Eq. (6.108) γ (k) is a Markov chain with two states
(γ 1 = 1, γ 2 = σ ). The initial probabilities
of these
states pσ and p1 and the
pσσ pσ 1
Markov chain transition matrix Pi j = are given.
p1σ p11
The estimation equation is expressed by Formula (6.110), but the a posteriori
probabilities of a healthy channel state are included in the characteristics of a Markov
chain:
*
f 1 (k) i=1,σ p1i p(i|k − 1)
p(1|k) = * * . (6.111)
j=1,σ f j (k) i=1,σ p ji p(i|k − 1)
6. In the case of the observation Eq. (6.109) and γ (k), represented by a Markov
chain with the states γ 1 = 1, γ 2 = 0, the suboptimal estimation algorithm is
described by Formula (6.110) with the replacement of the expression for the a
posteriori probability of the channel healthy state by the ratio taking into account
the Markov properties of the parametric variable γ (k):
*1
f 1 (k) p1i p(i|k − 1)
p(1|k) = *1 i=0
*1 ,
j=0 f j (k) i=0 p ji p(i|k − 1)
where pij are the elements of the known Markov chain transfer matrix Pij .
The calculation p(1|k) at each step leads to a significant increase in computational
costs, so it is of interest to simplify the algorithm. Consider such a simplification
in the case when γ (k) is a random variable independent at each step. As shown
in [150], the value of pi (1|k) (i = 0, 1) in specific implementations of the filtering
process can take only values close to unity if the residual zi (k) falls into a certain
region and close to zero if the residual zi (k) does not fall into . The boundaries
of the domain depend on qi (k) and the parameters of the densities f i (k). Given
the value of ε > 0, by which the probability pi (1|k) can differ from unity, one can
determine the magnitude of the thresholds with which the vector zi (k) is compared.
If the components of zi (k) are greater than thresholds by modulus, then the decision
is made that pi (1|k) = 1, otherwise—pi (1|k) = 0. The first of these decisions can be
called the decision of λ1 (k) to carry out the correction, the second—by the decision
of λ0 (k) about the prohibition of the correction (transition to extrapolation mode).
When comparing the discrepancy with the thresholds, the following situations are
possible:
• right correction, when the decision λ1 (k) is made with γ i (k) = 1 with the
probability of PRC ;
• a right prohibition of correction, when the decision λ0 (k) is made with probability
PRP when γ 1 (k) = 1 (or γ 2 (k) = 0);
• a false correction, when with the probability of a PFC a decision is made λ0 (k)
with γ 1 (k) = 1 (or γ 2 (k) = 0);
• skipping the correction, when with the probability of the PSC a decision is made
λ0 (k) with γ 1 (k) = 1.
The probabilities of correct decisions and erroneous decisions about correction
are equal: errors of the first kind q1∗ = (1 − qi )PFC , errors of the second kind—
q2∗ = qi PSC , correct decisions—q3∗ = qi PRC and q4∗ = (1 − qi )PRP . The degree
of danger of errors of the first kind is significantly greater than the errors of the
second kind, as they lead to a malfunction of the correction filter. Taking this into
account, when choosing a decision rule, Neiman–Pearson criterion should be used
q2∗ , achieving the lowest possible value for a given small value q1∗ . Reductions q1∗ can
be achieved either by increasing qi or decreasing the PFC . One of the ways to reduce
PFC can be the introduction of averaging into the correction control algorithm. Its task
is to smooth the correction signals (residuals). If for some time T, correction signals
are received periodically from the STM, then the average value of these signals will
be the average value of these signals at the output of the averager, which is much
smaller than the signal for false correction. The number of false corrections will
decrease, and the value of the correction signal will be closer to the true value.
Another way to reduce the likelihood q1∗ is associated with the choice of compar-
ison thresholds. The exact value of the thresholds can be determined if the distribu-
tions of normal, anomalous STM errors and extrapolation errors are known. Approx-
imate values of thresholds d can be determined by the specified error of measuring
the STM. For example, when processing signals RSBN for the range channel take
d = 0.2 km, for the azimuth channel—d = 0.25°. In this case, with the normal
distribution of the correction signal for the range channel q1∗ = 0.04(1 − qi ), for the
channel azimuth q1∗ = 0.05(1 − qi ). If the errors of STM are not known in advance,
then adaptation of the thresholds is used.
Suboptimal estimation algorithms are obtained in the assumption that in the
models of variable parameters γ (k) in the form of an independent or Markov random
sequence, the probabilities of the healthy state of the q(k) measurement channel or the
elements of the Pij transition matrix are a priori known. Removing these restrictions
does not affect the basic estimation procedure, but concerns only the algorithms for
calculating the posterior probabilities of the healthy state of the measurement channel
p(1|k) and leads to suboptimal adaptive estimation algorithms in the presence of
failures in the measurement channel.
For the independent sequence γ (k), the adaptive calculation algorithm p(1|k)
differs from the non-adaptive one in that instead of the given probabilities q(k) the
values q(k − 1), recurrently calculated in accordance with the ratios [163] are used
1
−
→
q(k − 1) = q f (q| Y k−1
1 )dq,
0
−
→
−
→k−1 [q f 1 (k) + (1 − q) f σ (k)] f (q) Y k−1
1 ]
f (q| Y 1 ) = .
f 1 (k)q(k − 2) + f σ (k)[1 − q(k − 2)]
For γ (k) in the form of a Markov chain, an adaptive algorithm was obtained in
[154].

Parameters with Abrupt Change in Measurement Noise
We will consider, as in Sect. 6.7.2, the Bayesian problem of estimating the state
vector described − →ρ (k) by the equation of state (6.103).
−
→
The vector ρ (k) is observed by a multichannel system consisting of M channels,
and each of the channels at a given time can be either in good condition or in a state
of failure. In good condition, the noise of the measurement of the ith channel is a
Gaussian vector − → v i (k) with zero mean and correlation matrix E[−
→
v i (k)−
→
v i−T ( j)] =
Rii (k)δ(k j). The presence of failures in each channel leads to a sharp increase in
measurement noise, so that the corresponding correlation matrix becomes equal
σi2 Rii (k)δ(k j), σi2 1. Therefore, the observation equation for the ith channel can
be represented as
−
→
y i (k) = Hi (k)−
→
ρ (k) + γi (k)−
→
v i (k), (6.112)
where γ i (k) is a parametric variable that takes two values—1 and σ i —and describes
the statistical characteristics of failures in the ith channel.
To solve the estimation problem − →ρ (k), following [150], let us unite the
observation Eq. (6.112) into a single observation vector of the following form:
−
→
y (k) = H (k)−
→
ρ (k) + (k)−
→
v (k),
where − →
y (k) is the composite vector of observations; H (k) =
[ H1T (k) H2T (k) . . . HMT (k)]T —the resulting block measurement matrix; G(k)
= diag[γ 1 (k), γ 2 (k), …, γ M (k)] is a random diagonal matrix, the elements of which
are the parameters γ i (k) with given statistical properties; −
→
v (k)—vector of Gaussian
measurement noise with zero mean and correlation matrix R(k) = diag[R11 (k),
R22 (k),…, RMM (k)].
Let us consider the estimation algorithms for the same models of the parameter
vector of the parameter (k), as in Sect. 6.7.2.
1. Let γ i (k) = γ i be a random variable, independent of k, equal to 1 with a known
probability qi and σ i with a probability 1 − qi , that is, each channel by the time
the system starts operating is either in good condition or in a state of failure.
The optimal estimate of the state vector in this case is
σ1 σ2 σM
ˆ
ρ(k) = ... xˆ i1 i2 ...i M (k) p(i 1 , i 2 , . . . , i M |k), i j = 1, σ ; j = 1, . . . , M,
i 1 =1 i 2 =1 i M =1
−
→k
where ρˆ i1 i2 ...i M (k) = ρ(k|γˆ 1 = i 1 , . . . , γ M = i M , Y 1 )—private assessment of the
−
→
state vector ρ (k) for the specific implementation of failures in the measurement
channels;
−
→
p(i 1 , i 2 , . . . , i M |k) = P[γ1 = i 1 , γ2 = i 2 , . . . , γ M = i M | Y k1 ]—a posteriori
probability of this implementation.
Since the equations of state and observations are linear, and the random processes
in them are Gaussian, the partial estimates ρˆ i1 i2 ...i M (k) can be calculated using one
of the formulas for multichannel Kalman filtration with fixed values γ j = i j (i j =
1, σ j ; j = 1, . . . , M) in each channel.
For example, for a multichannel filter in the form (6.62a–6.62e)
M
ρˆ i1 i2 ...i M (k) = ρˆ i1 i2 ...i M (e) (k) + Pi1 i2 ...i M (k)H jT (k)[i 2j R j j (k)]−1
j=1
× [−
→
y j (k) − H j (k)ρˆ i1 i2 ...i M (e) (k)].
Here ρˆ i1 i2 ...i M (e) (k) = (k, k −1)ρˆ i1 i2 ...i M (k −1) is the private estimate of extrapo-
lation; Pi1 i2 ...i M (k)—filtering correlation matrix for partial errors, which are calculated
based on (6.62d):
⎡ ⎤−1
M
Pi1 i2 ...i M (k) = Pi1 i2 ...i M (e) (k)⎣ I + H jT (k)[i 2j R j j (k)]−1 H j (k)Pi1 i2 ...i M (e) (k)⎦
j=1
where Pi1 i2 ...i M (e) (k) = (k, k − 1)Pi1 i2 ...i M (k) T (k, k − 1) + Q(k − 1)—correlation
matrix of private extrapolation estimates.
For a multichannel filter in the form (6.66), (6.67)
ρˆ i1 i2 ...i M (k) = Pi1 i2 ...i M (k) Pi−1

1 i 2 ...i M (e)
(k)ρˆ i1 i2 ...i M (e) (k)
⎫
M ⎬
+ [Pi−1 (k) ˆ i j (k) − P −1 (k)ρˆ i j (e) (k)] ,
ρ i j (e)
j
⎭
j=1
where ρˆ i j (k) is the partial evaluation of the filtering of the jth channel at a fixed
value; γ j = i j ; ρˆ i j (e) (k)—private evaluation of the extrapolation of the jth channel
with; γ j = i j ; Pi j (k) and Pi j (e) (k), respectively, the correlation matrix of errors of
particular estimates of filtering and extrapolation with γ j = i j .
A posteriori probabilities of a specific implementation of the health conditions of
measurement channels p(i1 ,i2 ,…,iM |k) can be calculated in a recurrent form based
on the relation (6.106), which in this case takes the following form:
p(i 1 , i 2 , . . . , i M |k)
−
→
f [−→ y (k)|γ1 = i 1 , γ2 = i 2 , . . . , γ M = i M , Y k−1 1 ] p(i 1 , i 2 , . . . , i M |k − 1) ,
= *
σ1 * σ2 *σ M −→ −
→k−1
i 1 =1 i 2 =2 . . . i M =1 f [ y (k)|γ 1 = i ,
1 2 γ = i 2 , . . . , γ M = i M , Y 1 ] p(i ,
1 2i , . . . , i M |k − 1)
where is conditional probability distribution.

−
→
f [−
→y (k)|γ1 = i 1 , γ2 = i 2 , . . . , γ M = i M , Y k−1
1 ] is Gaussian and is equal to:
−
→
f [−
→
y (k)|γ1 = i 1 , γ2 = i 2 , . . . , γ M = i M , Y k−1
1 ]
= N {H (k) (k, k − 1)ρˆ i1 i2 ...i M (k − 1),

H (k)Pi1 i2 ...i M (e) (k)H T (k) + i1 i2 ...i M (k)R(k)iT1 i2 ...i M (k)},
i1 i2 ...i M (k)—a specific implementation random matrix a parametric variable G(k).
A posteriori probabilities of a specific implementation of the health conditions of
measurement channels p(i1 , i2 ,…, iM |k) can be calculated under the initial condition
M i
p(i 1 , i 2 , . . . , i M |0) = q j j (1 − q j )1−i j ,
j=1
where ij = 1 when the jth channel is in good condition (γ j = 1) and ij = 0 when

correcting in the jth channel, i.e., at γ j = σ j .
To calculate the correlation matrix of filtering errors, you can use the general
Formula (6.107) for single-channel estimation, which in this case will take the
following form:
T −
→
P(k) = E [−
→ ˆ
ρ (k) − ρ(k)][ −
→ ˆ
ρ (k) − ρ(k)] | Y k1
σ1 σ2 σM
= ··· Pi1 i2 ...i M (k) + [ρˆ i1 i2 ...i M (k) − ρ(k)][
ˆ ρˆ i1 i2 ...i M (k) − ρ(k)]
ˆ T
i 1 =1 i 2 =1 i M =1
p(i 1 i 2 . . . i M |k).
2. Let γ j (k) take independent values 1 and σ i at each measurement step with
probabilities qi and 1 − qi , respectively. In this case, the random matrix (k),
which is included in the observation equation, depends on k.
The exact optimal estimation algorithm assumes summation over all j = 1, …,

M and over all k, i.e., requires an infinitely growing amount of memory. Therefore,
just as in the single-channel case, a suboptimal algorithm can be obtained under the
assumption that the distribution of estimates of extrapolation with the mean vector
ρ̂e (k) and the correlation matrix Pe (k) is Gaussian.
The suboptimal multichannel estimate, calculated in the form (6.62a–6.62e), has
the form
M
1σ σ σM
1 2
ˆρ(k) = ρˆ e (k) + ··· Pi i ...i (k)H T [i 2 (k)R j j (k)]−1
1 2 M j j
j=1 i 1 =1 i 2 =1 i M =1
p(i 1 , i 2 , . . . , i M |k) × [−
→
y j (k) − H j (k)ρˆ e (k)] , (6.113)
where i j = 1, σ j ; j = 1, . . . , M; ρˆ e (k) = (k, k − 1)ρ(k

ˆ − 1)—multichannel
extrapolation estimate.
A posteriori probabilities of various combinations of health conditions of
measurement channels are equal
p(i 1 , i 2 , . . . , i M |k)
−
→
f [−→y (k)|−→ ij
γ i1 i2 ...i M , Y k−1
1 ] j=1 q j (1 − q j )
M 1−i j
=* *σ2 *σ M −
→k−1 M i j ,
σ1
· · · [ −
→ (k)| −
→
γ , ] (1 − )
i 1 =1 i 2 =2 i M =M f y i 1 i 2 ...i M
Y 1 q
j=1 j q j
1−i j
−
→
where f [−
→
y (k)|−
→γ i1 i2 ...i M , Y k−1
1 ]—conditional density of probability distribution of
measurements −→y (k), calculated for a specific implementation of i1 , i2 , …, iM of the
parameter vector −
→
γ (k) = [γ1 (k), γ2 (k), . . . , γ M (k)]T .
3. Let the parametric variable γi (k) in each channel form a Markov chain with two
states—1 and σ. Transition probability matrix for the jth channel
& '
( j) ( j)
pσ σ pσ 1
Pn( j) = ( j) ( j) .
p1σ p11
It is assumed known, and the sequence γi (k) in each channel is independent of

each other.
The estimation algorithm is expressed by the same formula as in the previous
case. A posteriori probabilities p(i1 , i2 , …, iM |k), calculated taking into account the
statistical dependence of the measurement channels on adjacent steps, are equal to
p(i 1 , i 2 , . . . , i M |k)
−
→ −
→k−1
f [−
→ y (k)|− →
γ i1 i2 ...i M (k) Y k−1 −
→
1 ]P( γ i 1 i 2 ...i M (k)| Y 1 )
=* *σ2 *σ M −
→k−1 →k−1 ,
−
σ1 −
→ −
→ −
→
i 1 =1 i 2 =2 · · · i M =1 f [ y (k)| γ i 1 i 2 ...i M (k) Y 1 ]P( γ i 1 i 2 ...i M (k)| Y 1 )
where the probability of a specific implementation of a vector −

→
γ (k) is calculated by
the formula
σ
−
→ −
→
P(−
→ M ( j)
γ i1 i2 ...i M (k)| Y k−1
1 )= pi j n P[γ j (k − 1) = n| Y k−1
1 ];
j=1
n=1
i j = 1, σ ; n = 1, σ ;
−
→
P[γ j (k − 1) = i j | Y k−1
1 ]—probabilities of the states of individual channels at the
previous step (k − 1).
Ways to simplify the above suboptimal algorithms are discussed in [150].

Parameters for Combined Failures in Measurement
Channels
Let, as before, the change in navigation parameters is described by the equation of

state
−
→
ρ (k) = (k, k − 1)−
→
ρ (k − 1) + −
→
w (k − 1).
The state vector is observed by a multichannel system consisting of M sensors,

and each of the sensors at a given time can either be in the state of hardware failure
or processes the input signal −→y i (k). We believe that each sensor contains an inde-
pendent control device (CD) that can detect hardware failures of the sensor. If the
CD detects a hardware failure of the sensor, then an unavailability matrix is set in
its output data, and thus the sensor is disconnected from the input of the complex
information processing algorithm. A similar situation occurs during the test control.
When the sensors are in good condition, regardless of errors, the sensor data is fed
to the input of the CPI algorithm.
Let the observation equation for the ith sensor be [158, 159]
−
→
y i (t) = Hi (k)−
→
ρ (k) + Hoi (k)−
→
ν i (k, tjumpi )1(k, tjumpi )
−
→
+ γ (k) ν (k), i = 1, . . . , N , (6.114)
i i
where −→y i (t) is the measurement vector; Hi (k)—matrix of observations; − →v i (k)—

vector of Gaussian measurement noise with zero mean and correlation matrix
E{−
→v i (k)−
→ v iT ( j)} = Ri (k)δ(k j); γi (k)—parameter characterizing the failure of the
meter in the form of a sharp increase in measurement noise; − →ν i (k, tjumpi )—vector
of a jump arising at the moment tjumpi ; Hoi (k)—matrix observation of the jump;
1(k, tjumpi )—single step function.
Model (6.114) describes the measurement process carried out by the ith sensor, in
which there can be informational failures in the form of a sharp increase in measure-
ment noise characterized by a parameter γi (k), and in the form of displacements,
drifts in measurements, the appearance of which can be associated with malfunction
of the measurement channel or exposure to interference, for example, reflections
from local objects [32]. We will further call the reduced model the combined failure
in the measurement channels.
The general and particular models of failure parameters γi (k), studied in [150],
are given in clause 6.7.3. Drift −
→
ν i (k, tjumpi ) will be described by the model
−
→ −
→
ν i (k + 1, tjumpi ) = ϕi (k + 1, k)−
→
ν i (k, tjumpi ) + ξ i (k), (6.115)
where ϕi (k + 1, k) is the transition matrix of the state of the dynamic system simu-
−
→
lating a parameter change in time after the jump; ξ i (k)—Gaussian vector with zero
mean and correlation matrix Q oi (k)δ(k j).
We further consider that the matrix ϕi (k + 1, k) of each channel is non-special. A
priori distributions of random variables tjumpi and − →ν i (tjumpi − 1, tjumpi ) are assumed
to be unknown.
The considered task is to evaluate the parameter − →ρ (k) using a multichannel
system with simultaneous detection of combined failures and subsequent (after the
jump) estimation of vectors − →ν i (k). As indicated in [158], a number of approaches are
possible for solving the problem of vector − →ν i (k) estimation—detecting the moment
of change of statistical characteristics using the methods of statistical sequential anal-
ysis [163] or distinguishing many hypotheses [150]. The disadvantage of the first
approach is the difficulty of obtaining vector − →
ν i (k, tjumpi ) estimates after a jump
occurs. When distinguishing many hypotheses, the implementation of an optimal
algorithm requires an infinitely increasing amount of memory. Therefore, it is advis-
able to simplify the multichannel estimation algorithm with the detection of combined
failures [159].
The first stage of this simplification is to single out the task of detecting failures,
characterized by a vector − →ν i (k), and evaluating the dynamics of the process after a
failure into an independent task solved by the method described in [159]. After the
discovery and estimation of the jump − →ν i (k, tjumpi ), the multichannel algorithm for
−
→
estimating the navigation parameter ρ (k) is synthesized only taking into account the
uncertainty created by the parameters γi (k), and the vector − →
ν i (k, tjumpi ) is considered
as a known signal.
At the second stage, the multichannel estimation device is synthesized using the
Gaussian approximation method, which makes it possible to limit the filter memory
by folding at each step the true a posteriori density of the estimated state vector
−
→ρ (k) to Gaussian. With such a subcourse, the suboptimal estimate at the output
of the multichannel device for estimating under the assumption of independence of

random values γi (k) is expressed by Formula (6.113).
With another model of change γi (k), only the procedure for calculating the
posterior probabilities p(i1 , i2 , …, iM |k) changes (see Sect. 6.7.3).
Let us give a simplified form of the conclusion of the algorithm for joint detection
and estimation of drifts −
→
ν i (k, tjumpi ), which the authors called the violation detection
algorithm (VDA) [159]. We further consider that the information failures described
by the parameter γi (k), which can take one of two values—1 and σ i , and the fail-
ures described by the vector − →ν i (k, tjumpi ) are independent. Failures −
→ν i (k, tjumpi ) in
different channels are also independent.
Until the moment tjumpi of the appearance of a jump (i.e., when k < tjumpi ), the
equation of optimal estimates − →ρ (k) of the state vector in the ith channel is given by
the Kalman filtering algorithm
ρˆ i (k) = ρˆ ei (k) + K i (k)−

→
z i (k), (6.116)
where Ki (k) is the matrix transfer coefficient of the filter; − →

z i (k) = −→y (k) −
−
→
Hi (k) ρ ei (k)—update process in ith channel.
ˆ
Substituting into the equation for ρ(k) and − → z i (k) observations −
→y (k) from
Eq. (6.114), for the moments of discrete time ti , k, we get
z i (k) = −
−
→ →
z 1i (k) + ψoi (k, tjumpi )−
→
ν i (k, tjumpi ) + Hi (k) (k, k − 1)−
→
ε 1i (k, tjumpi ).
(6.117)
The component − →z 1i (k) of the updating process associated with the unper-
turbed observation model is a Gaussian δ-correlated sequence with zero mean and
correlation matrix
Pz1i (k) = Hi (k)Pei (k)HiT (k) + R̃i (k),
where Pei (k) is the correlation matrix of the extrapolation error of the Kalman filter;
R̃i (k)δ(k j)—correlation noise matrix, equal if Ri (k)δ(k j), until t jumpi , the parameter
γ i was equal to 1, and equal if σi2 Ri (k)δ(k j), before t jumpi , the parameter γ i took the
value σi .
The vector −
→
ε 1i (k, tjumpi ) sets the state of a Gaussian Markov sequence.
−
→ −
→
ε 1i (k + 1, tjumpi ) = G i (k + 1, k)−
→
ε 1i (k, tjumpi ) + Di (k + 1, tjumpi ) ξ i (k)
(6.118)
with parameters − →ε 1i (tjumpi − 1, tjumpi ) = 0; G i (k + 1, k) = [I −

K i (k)Hi (k)] (k, k − 1); Di (k + 1, tjumpi ) = [K i (k)Hoi (k) + G i (k +
1, k)Di (k, tjumpi )]ϕi−1 (k + 1, k); Di (tjumpi , tjumpi ) = 0.
For a matrix ψoi (k, tjumpi ), recurrence expressions have the form
ψoi (k, tjumpi ) = Hoi (k) − Hi (k) (k, k − 1)Foi (k − 1, tjumpi )ϕi−1 (k, k − 1);
Foi (k, tjumpi ) = K i (k)ψoi (k, tjumpi ) + (k, k − 1)Foi (k − 1, tjumpi )ϕi−1 (k, k − 1).
Thus, the appearance of a correlated drift in the original observations

leads to the appearance of a correlated signal − →
z i (k) in the renewal process
ψoi (k, tjumpi )−
→
ν i (k, tjumpi ) + Hi (k) × (k, k − 1)−
→
ε 1i (k, tjumpi ) against the back-
ground of white noise.
We introduce a new extended state vector
εi (k, tjumpi ) = [−
→
ν iT (k, tjumpi ), −
→
ε T1i (k, tjumpi )]T .
Having defined transition matrices of state and disturbances, respectively, as

% %
% ϕi (k + 1, k) 0 %
Bi (k + 1, k) = % %
%;
0 G i (k + 1, k) %
% %
% I %
Ji (k + 1, tjumpi ) = %% %, (6.119)
Di (k + 1, tjumpi ) %
get the equation of state of the extended system
−
→ −
→
ε i (k + 1, tjumpi ) = Bi (k + 1, k)−
→
ε i (k, tjumpi ) + Ji (k + 1, tjumpi ) ξ (k).
Introducing the matrix of observations
.
Ti (k, tjumpi ) = [ψoi (k, tjumpi )..Hi (k) (k, k − 1)],
It is possible to present the updating process −

→
z i (k) for k ≥ t jumpi as observation of
−
→
a dynamic system with a combination ε i (k, tjumpi ) and white noise of observation
−
→z 1i (k):
−
→ ε i (k, tjumpi ) + −
z i (k) = Ti (k, tjumpi )−
→ →
z 1i (k).
Thus, the detection and estimation of changes in the parameters of a dynamic

process in the ith channel of measuring navigation parameters − →ρ (k) are reduced to
the task of distinguishing a simple hypothesis. But a relatively complex alternative
H1 {tjumpi , −
→
ε i (k, tjumpi )}:
H0 : −
→
z i (k) = −
→
z 1i (k); (6.120)
ε i (k, tjumpi )} : −
H1 {tjumpi , −
→ → ε i (k, tjumpi ) + −
z i (k) = Ti (k, tjumpi )−
→ →
z 1i (k).
Since there is no a priori information about the probability distribution of a random

vector −
→ν i (k, tjumpi ) and, consequently − →
ε i (k, tjumpi ), and also the moment tci , to solve
the problem of testing hypotheses (6.120), one can use the criterion of the generalized
LR. The algorithm consists in estimating the process − →ε i (k, tjumpi ), substitution of
ˆ
the estimate εi (k, tjumpi ) into the logarithm of the likelihood ratio λi (k, tjumpi ), finding
the maximum λi (k, tjumpi ) in t ci and comparing this maximum with the threshold.
It can be shown that the relation for λi (k, tjumpi ) fair value [159]
λi (k, tjumpi ) = λi (k − 1, tjumpi ) + ln det Pz1i (k) − ln det Pzi (k)

+− →z iT (k)Pz1i−1 (k)−
→
z i (k) − [−
→
z i (k) − zˆ i (k)]T Pzi−1 (k)[−
→
z i (k)
− zˆ i (k)]; λi (tjumpi − 1, tjumpi ) = 0 (6.121)
For a fixed t jumpi assessment zˆ i (k), the maximizing estimate (6.121) is equal to
zˆ i (k) = E[−
→
z i (k)|−
→
z k−1 ˆ
tjumpi , H1 ] = Ti (k, tjumpi )ε ie (k, tjumpi ) (6.122)
where εˆ ie (k, tjumpi ) = Bi (k, k − 1)εˆ i (k − 1, tjumpi ) is the extrapolation estimate of

the Kalman filter matched with the dynamics model and the observation equation.
In this case, the matrix Pzi (k) can be calculated using the equation
Pzi (k) = Ti (k, tjumpi )Pεei (k, tci )TiT (k, tjumpi ) + Pz1i (k)
where Pεei (k, tjumpi ) is the correlation matrix of the extrapolation error of the Kalman
filter, which forms the estimate (6.122).
Substituting the optimized estimates εˆ i (k, tjumpi ) for all t jumpi = 1, …, k in (6.121),
we get the maximum likelihood estimate of the moment of change of the parameters
t jumpi from the condition:
tˆjumpi = arg max λi (k, tjumpi ). (6.123)

tjumpi
To reduce computations, when defining tˆjumpi in [158, 159], the restriction of the
analyzed time interval was proposed to be a “sliding window” with a width of M
steps. In this case tˆjumpi , the estimate should be sought only within the interval k −
M + 1 ≤ t jumpi ≤ k. In this case, the number of estimates εˆ i (k, tjumpi ) calculated at
each step is reduced to M.
The final solution to the problem of detecting and evaluating changes in the
updating process of the ith measurement channel is comparing the logarithm of
the generalized relationship of similarity with the threshold, which is selected based
on the given probability of false alarm:
H1 {tˆjumpi , εˆ i (k, tˆjumpi )} : λi (k, tjumpi ) > λ0 , k − M + 1 ≤ tˆjumpi ≤ k;

H0 : λi (k, tjumpi ) < λ0 . (6.124)
For estimating the state vector − →ρ (k) in each channel, an estimation algorithm
that takes into account failures is used γi (k) (see Sect. 6.7.3), whose input sequence
of observations when making decisions on the detection of drift − →
ν i (k, tjumpi ) is
corrected by the estimates of this drift.
A block diagram of the algorithm for detecting, estimating and compensating for
drift is shown in Fig. 6.12. It includes a detection algorithm, consisting of a scheme
for calculating the likelihood ratio values, a maximum value selection device and a
threshold device, which allows you to select the maximum likelihood estimates of
the failure moment and the magnitude of the error it causes [160].
The structural scheme of the estimation and compensation algorithm contains a
block that implements the drift compensation, which makes it possible to obtain
the sequence of observations cleared of correlated disturbances at the input of the
complex filtering algorithm.
After detection of a sensor failure by the detection and estimation algorithm, the
occurrence of displacements or drifts in the estimations of the CPI algorithms is moni-
tored. If such an offset (or drift) is fixed, and its magnitude and sign coincide with
the estimates of the vector νˆ i (k, tjumpi ), or the difference between these magnitudes
does not exceed a given threshold, then corrective corrections and measurements are
not entered. The matrix H 0i (k) in this case is nullified, since in this case the drift is
obviously associated with a change in the parameters of the trajectory. In the case
when the detection of displacement in the data of navigation sensors is not accom-
panied by the appearance of displacements in the complex estimates, compensating
influences in the measurements should be introduced, since the fixed displacement
corresponds to the cases of changing the parameters of the measuring path, the
appearance of correlation at its input interference or unreliability of the navigation
signals received by radio meters. At the same time, it is possible to identify the source
of failure (radiotechnical meter or an external source of interference) based on the
Detection ν̂ i ( k , t̂ ci )
Algorithm -
Evaluation
К t̂ ci
Hoi(k)
From the CPI
algorithm
y i(k ) Grade Recalculation

− Comparison − of coordinates
Algorithm
To the CPI
y 1(k ) algorithm
Fig. 6.12 Block diagram of the algorithm for drift detecting, estimating and compensating
test avionics control data and the meter status words accompanying the navigation
data in the airborne gages.
The results of mathematical modeling [159, 160] make it possible to conclude
that the algorithm under consideration is highly efficient, in particular when detecting
reflections in the MLS channels and compensating for errors associated with their
effect.
6.7.5 Multichannel Nonlinear Estimation of Navigation

Parameters in Case of Combined Failures
in Measurement Channels
Let us consider the problem of multichannel nonlinear estimation of navigation

parameters using radio data (multichannel nonlinear filtering of radio data) with
combined failures in measurement channels.
Let, as before, the equation of state for the navigation parameters be
−
→ −
→
ρ (k) = (k, k − 1)−
→
ρ (k − 1) + ζ (k − 1), (6.3)
−
→ −
→
where the state noise ζ (k) has a mean value ζ 0 (k) and a covariance matrix Q(k).
We write the equations of observation of the meters as a sequence [159]
−
→
y i (k) = h i [−
→
ρ (k)] + Hoi (k)−
→
ν i (k, tjumpi )1(k, tjumpi )
−
→
+ γ (k) v (k), i = 1, . . . , N , (6.125)
i i
where − → y i (k) is the measurement vector representing the ML-estimates of the infor-
−
→ −
→
mative parameters Q i (t) associated with nonlinear dependencies Q i (t) = h i [− →ρ (t)]
−
→
with navigation parameters; ν i (k)—vector of Gaussian measurement noise with
zero mean and correlation matrix Ri (k)δ(k j); γi (k)—a parameter characterizing
the failure of the meter in the form of a sharp increase in measurement noise;
−
→ν i (k, tjumpi )—vector of the jump arising at the moment t jumpi ; Hoi (k)—matrix
observation of the jump; 1(k, tjumpi )—single step function.
Models of change γi (k) and − → ν i (k, tjumpi ) will be considered the same as in the
case of linear estimation (clause 6.7.4).
The nonlinear estimation algorithm − →ρ (k) using a multichannel system for
combined failures differs from the linear estimation algorithm in the joint detection
and drift estimation − →ν i (k, tjumpi ).
We will further assume that up to the moment t jumpi of a jump (i.e., when k < t jumpi ),
the equation of suboptimal estimates of the state vector − →
ρ (k) in the ith channel is
given by the quasilinear algorithm
ρˆ i (k) = ρˆ ei (k) + K i (k)−

→
z i (k)
where K i (k) = Pi (k)HiT (k)Ci (k) filter matrix transfer coefficient; HiT (k)—matrix
∂h i [−
→
ρ (t)]
with elements ∂ρ j −
→
= [Pei−1 (k) + HiT (k)Ci (k)Hi (k)]−1 —the
Pi (k)
ρ =ρˆ ei (k)
covariance matrix of the ith APM-estimate of the vector −
→
ρ;
Ci (k)—the matrix of partial derivatives of the second order of the logarithm of
−
→ →∗
−̂
the FLR for the components of the vector i (t) at a point i (k);
−
→z i (k) = −
→
y i (k) − h i [ρˆ ei (k)]—updating process in the ith measurement channel.
Suppose that at the time t jumpi there was a jump in the process of drift. The updating
process for the moment k = t jumpi will be equal to
z i (k) = −
−
→ →
y i (k) − h i [ρˆ ei (k)]
=−→
y 1i (k) + Hoi (k)− →ν i (k, tjumpi ) − h i [ρˆ ei (k)]
−
→
= z (k) + H (k) ν (k, t −
→ ),
1i oi i jumpi
where −→
y 1i (k) is the component of the vector − →y i (k) for the case if the jump was
absent, z 1i (k) is the corresponding component −
−
→ →
y 1i (k) of the updating process.
Evaluation at the output of the filter at time k + 1:
ρˆ i (k + 1) = ρˆ ei (k + 1) + K i (k + 1)−
→
z i (k + 1)
−
→
= ρˆ (k + 1) + K (k + 1) z (k + 1)
ei i 1i
+ K i (k + 1)Hoi (k + 1)−
→
ν i (k + 1, tjumpi )
= ρˆ (k + 1) + K (k + 1)H (k + 1)−
1i i
→ν (k + 1, m),
oi i
where ρˆ 1i (k + 1) is the component of the filtration evaluation of the state vector in

the absence of a jump.
For the moment of time k + 2, we get
z i (k + 2|k + 1) = −
−
→ →
y i (k + 2) − h i (ρˆ ei (k + 2))
=−→
y 1i (k + 2) + Hoi (k + 2)− →ν i (k + 2, m) − h i (ρˆ ei (k + 2))
=−→
y (k + 2) + H (k + 2)−
1i
→ν (k + 2, m)
oi i
− h i {F(k + 2, k + 1)[ρˆ 1i (k + 1)
+ K (k + 1)H (k + 1)−
i oi
→ν (k + 1, m)]}. i
Consider the function
h{ (k + 2, k + 1)ρˆ 1i (k + 1) + (k + 2, k + 1)K i (k + 1)
H (k + 1)−
oi
→ν (k + 1, m)}.
i
Its argument consists of two terms. The first term is a component of the extrap-
olation estimate vector ρˆ 1e (k + 2) in the absence of a jump, and the second is a
component due to a jump in the (k + 1)th step. Suppose that the function h has the
first derivative at a point ρˆ ei (k + 2). Replacing the function h on the interval
[ρˆ 1e (k + 2), ρˆ 1e (k + 2) + (k + 2, k + 1)K i (k + 1)Hoi (k + 1)−

→
ν i (k + 1, m)]
its linear approximation, the increment of the function h caused by the increment
of the argument by the value (k + 2, k + 1)K i (k + 1)Hoi (k + 1)− →ν i (k + 1, m) can
be approximately calculated using the following relation:
Hi (k + 2) (k + 2|k + 1)K i (k + 1)Hoi (k + 1)−

→
ν i (k + 1, tjumpi ).
Thus, the value of the function h at the point
ρˆ 1ei (k + 2) + (k + 2|k + 1)K i (k + 1)Hoi (k + 1)−

→
ν i (k + 1, m)
can be calculated as follows:
h{ (k + 2|k + 1)[ρˆ 1 (k + 1) + K i (k + 1)H0i (k + 1)−

→
ν i (k + 1, tjumpi )]}
≈ h{ (k + 2|k + 1)ρˆ 1i (k + 1)} + Hi (k + 2) (k + 2|k + 1)K i (k + 1)
× H (k + 1)−
oi
→ν (k + 1, t
i )}. jumpi
The expressions for the update process and the filter evaluation will be
z i (k + 2) = −
−
→ →
y 1i (k + 2) + H0i (k + 2)−
→
ν i (k + 2), m)
− h{ (k + 2|k + 1)ρˆ 1i (k + 1)}
− Hi (k + 2) (k + 2|k + 1)K i (k + 1)Hoi (k + 1)−
→
ν i (k + 1, m)
−
→ −
→
= z (k + 2|k + 1) + H (k + 2) ν (k + 2, m)
1i 0i i
− HiT (k + 2) (k + 2|k + 1)
× K (k + 1)H (k + 1)−
i oi
→ν (k + 1, m). i
Further transformations, analogous to the linear case in Sect. 6.7.4, lead for an
arbitrary k ≥ t jumpi to a similar algorithm with the only difference that in it the matrix
Hi(k) is in general a nonlinear function of the vector − →
ρ.
6.7.6 Algorithm for Generating Failure Signals

in a Multichannel Radio Data Processing System
6.7.6.1 Task Setting
At some critical stages of flight, high values of continuity and integrity (information
reliability) of navigation data are required. These stages include, in particular, the
stage of approach and landing an aircraft on any of the existing systems. A widely
used method of ensuring information reliability is the redundancy of equipment.
In a fully integrated avionics, backup is provided by the simultaneous operation of
several channels on the signals of the same radio system. The task of measuring the
same navigation parameters (e.g., geodetic latitude, longitude and altitude) according
to the information of several different navigation systems is reduced to the multi-
channel information processing scheme. In the previous subsections, we considered
some of the possible multichannel filtering algorithms with regard to failures, which
are reduced to the fusion (weighted summation) of private estimates. This subsec-
tion presents a different approach to the detection and localization of informational
failures, which uses a fusion of detection decisions [165].
The integrity of the fault-tolerant integrated avionics in critical applications can be
considered at various levels of operation: the system level of the solution of the navi-
gation problem, the level of operation of each DSP and the level of calculation of each
navigation parameter. The following approach is a hierarchical three-stage detection
scheme. Abnormal operation of the avionics is detected by merging solutions from N
signal processors. Incorrect operation in each DSP is detected by merging decisions
from M devices controlling the calculation of navigation parameters, one per each
navigation parameter. The incorrect calculation of the estimate of the navigation
parameter in each DSP is determined by detecting the discrepancies between the
estimates in the DSP.
The incorrect functioning of the integrated avionics will be defined in terms of
the integrity monitoring of the estimation of navigation parameters as follows:
1. The estimation of the jth parameter (j = 1, …, M) in the ith processor (i = 1,
…, N) at the kth time step is the result of incorrect functioning if:
j j
ρ̂i (k) > εi (k) for k = 1, 2, . . . , (6.126)
j
where ρ̂i (k) is the change in the estimate of the jth navigation parameter in the ith
processor at the kth time step due to improper functioning;
j
εi (k)—the maximum allowable change in the estimate.
j
Change ρ̂i (k) is defined as
j j j j,k−1
ρ̂i (k) = z i (k) − E{ρ̂i (k)|Ri }, (6.127)
j
where z i (k) is the estimate of the jth parameter in the ith processor at the kth step,
which may reflect a disorder;
j
ρ̂i (k)—correct (not caused by failure or violation of the evaluation process)
estimation of the jth parameter in the ith processor at the kth step;
j,k−1 j
Ri —a sequence of all past assessments ρ̂i (k) up to (k − 1)th step inclusive;
j j,k−1
E{ρ̂i (k)|Ri }—conditional expectation of the correct calculation of the jth
j
parameter at the kth step, given by all past estimates ρ̂i up to (k − 1)th step inclusive.
2. Processor i malfunctions if inequality (6.126) holds for any j in {1, …, M}.
3. The integrated avionics does not function correctly if the inequality (6.126)
holds for any processor i of {1, …, N}.
Definition 3 considers the conservative case of non-correct functioning. In this
definition, a fail-stable avionics malfunctioning if any of the processors are malfunc-
tioning. Other definitions of improper functioning can be used, or decisions on the
detection of a disorder of a process can be used to isolate it and reconfigure the
avionics.
We will further consider the problem for the following equation of state, common
to all processors:
−
→ −
→
ρ (k) = (k, k − 1)−
→
ρ (k − 1) + (k − 1) ζ (k − 1), (6.128)
−
→
where ζ (k) is the noise process vector; (k, k − 1) is the transition matrix of the
vector of navigation parameters −
→
ρ ; (k − 1) is the weighting matrix for the noise
−
→
process ζ (k).
Parameter estimates in processors will be defined by the following equations:
z i (k) = Hi (k)−
→
j j j
ρ (k) + vi (k), (6.129)
j
where vi (k) is the measurement noise when estimating the jth parameter in the ith
processor;
j
Hi (k)—matrix of weighting coefficients of measurements for calculating the jth
parameter in the ith processor.
The initial state of the vector of navigation parameters is denoted by −
→
ρ (k0 ).
Assume further the following assumptions:
1. The initial state −→ρ (k0 ) is a Gaussian random vector with mean −→ρ (k0 ) and
covariance matrix B(k 0 ).
−
→
2. The noise process ζ (k) is a Gaussian white noise with zero mean and a covari-
−
→
ance matrix Q(k). The noise process ζ (k) does not depend on the initial state
−
→ρ (k0 ).
j
3. Measurement noise vi (k) is Gaussian white noise with zero mean and variance
j
σvi2 j . Noise measurements vi (k) are independent among themselves and do not
−
→
depend on the initial state − →
ρ (k ) and noise process ζ (k).
0
4. Measurement errors of each processor are non-dependent.

The disorder detection is formulated in terms of testing statistical hypotheses:
H1: the state of malfunction, which correspond to the solution d = 1,
H0: nominal state (no malfunction), which correspond to solutions d = 0.
j
We assume that the parameter estimates z i (k) are characterized by probability
j
distribution density w[z i (k)|Hq ], q = 0, 1.
6.7.6.2 Disorder Detector When Evaluating the Jth Parameter

in the Ith Processor
Figure 6.13 illustrates the approach to detecting improper functioning when

evaluating the jth parameter in the ith processor.
The detection algorithm continuously uses the residual:
j j j
νi (k) = z i (k) − ρ̂i (k|k − 1), (6.130)
j j
where z i (k) is defined by equality (6.129), and ρ̂i (k|k − 1) is an estimate of the
j j,k−1
conditional mean E{ρ̂i (k)|Ri }.
j
An estimate ρ̂i (k|k − 1) can be formed using a Kalman filter or a quasilinear
algorithm. Under the assumptions made and using the Gaussian approximation for
j
the probability distribution density of the estimate z i (k) both under hypothesis H 0
and hypothesis H 1 , the Bayesian decision rule can be represented as follows [165]:
1. in the case of σ1i2 j (k) > σ0i2 j (k),
where σ1i2 j (k) is the variance of the residual under the hypothesis H 1 ;
σ0i2 j (k)—the variance of the residual under the hypothesis H 0 ,
j j j
di (k) = 1 at νi (k) ≥ λi (k) ,
j j j
di (k) = 0 at νi (k) < λi (k) , (6.131)
where the threshold is determined by the ratio
Fig. 6.13 Block diagram of the malfunction detection algorithm when calculating the jth parameter
in processor i
& 2 (k)a (k)]2 2 (k)a 2 (k) 2 (k)σ 2 (k) '1/2

j
[σ0i j ij σ0i j ij 2σ1i j 0i j σ1i j ti j
λi (k) = + + ln
2 (k) − σ 2 (k)]2
[σ1i 2 (k) − σ 2 (k)
σ1i 2 (k) − σ 2 (k)
σ1i σ0i j
j 0i j j 0i j j 0i j
σ0i2 (k)a (k)
j ij
− 2 2 (k)
, (6.132)
σ1i j (k) − σ0i j
ai j (k) = a1i j (k) − a0i j (k);
a1i j (k)—mean residuals under hypothesis H 1 ; a0i j (k)—mean residuals under

hypothesis H 0 ; t ij (k)—the threshold of the minimum risk criterion for the detector
when estimating the jth parameter in the ith processor;
2. in the case of σ1i2 j (k) < σ0i2 j (k)
j j j
di (k) = 1 at νi (k) < λi (k) ,
j j j
di (k) = 0 at νi (k) ≥ λi (k) , (6.133)
where the threshold is determined by Formula (6.132);

3. in the case of σ1i2 j (k) = σ0i2 j (k)
j j j
di (k) = 1 at νi (k) ≥ λi (k) ,
j j j
di (k) = 0 at νi (k) < λi (k) , (6.134)
where the threshold is determined by the formula
ai j (k) σ0i j (k) ln ti j (k)

2
j
λi (k) = + . (6.135)
2 ai j (k)
The effectiveness of the detector is determined by the probability of a false alarm

and the likelihood of incorrect detection. The false alarm probability is
∞
j j,k−1 j
Fi j (k) = P[di j (k) = 1|H0 ] = w H0 [ρ̂i (k)|Ri ]d ρ̂i (k), (6.136)
j
λi (k)
j j,k−1
where w H0 [ρ̂i (k)|Ri ]—Gaussian density under the hypothesis H 0 , and the
threshold is determined by the relations (6.132) and (6.135).
The probability of incorrect detection of the disorder during the evaluation of the
jth parameter in the ith processor
∞
j j,k−1 j
D̂i j (k) = 1 − P[di j (k) = 1|H1 ] = 1 − w H 1 [ρ̂i (k)|Ri ]d ρ̂i (k), (6.137)
j
λi (k)
j j,k−1
where w H 1 [ρ̂i (k)|Ri ] is approximated by Gaussian density under hypothesis
j
H 1 , and the threshold λi (k) is determined by relations (6.132) and (6.136). It is
shown [165] that this approximation gives a conservative detector in the sense that
the probability of incorrect detection will be lower than for a detector without a
Gaussian approximation. However, the probability of a false alarm in this detector
will be higher.
6.7.6.3 Detector Malfunction of the ith Processor
Figure 6.14 illustrates the approach to detecting improper operation of the ith
processor.
j
The solution d i (k) for the ith processor is the fusion of the solutions di (k) (j =
1,…, M) from the detectors of the estimation disorder of the M parameters in the ith
processor. The rule for merging solutions for the ith processor is
& 'dij (k) & '(1−dij (k))
4M
1 − D̂i j (k) D̂i j (k)
di (k) = 1 at ≥ ti (k),
j=1
Fi j (k) 1 − Fi j (k)
& 'dij (k) & '(1−dij (k))
4M
1 − D̂i j (k) D̂i j (k)
di (k) = 0 at < ti (k), (6.138)
j=1
Fi j (k) 1 − Fi j (k)
where t i (k) is the threshold of the minimum risk criterion for the detector of
malfunctioning of the ith processor.
The efficiency of the detector for the ith processor is determined by the probability
of a false alarm and the probability of incorrect detection, which can be calculated
as a function of the corresponding probabilities for the M detectors of evaluation
processes in the ith processor:
Fig. 6.14 “I” processor

d1i (k )
malfunction detection
d i2 (k )
Data fusion center di (k )
for i processor
…
d iM (k )
⎡
1 1 4
M
[1−dij (k)]
⎣
j
Fi (k) = ··· Fi j (k)di (k) 1 − Fi j (k)
di1 (k)=0 diM (k)−0 j=1
⎧ & 'dij (k) & '[1−dij (k)] ⎫
⎨4 M
1 − D̂i j (k) D̂i j (k) ⎬
×U − ti (k) , (6.139)
⎩ Fi j (k) 1 − Fi j (k) ⎭
j=1
⎡
1 1 M
4 dij (k)
⎣
j
D̂i (k) = 1 − ··· 1 − D̂i j (k) D̂i j (k)[1−di (k)]
di1 (k)=0 diM (k)−0 j=1
⎧ & 'dij (k) & '[1−dij (k)] ⎫
⎨4 M
1 − D̂i j (k) D̂i j (k) ⎬
×U − ti (k) (6.140)
⎩ Fi j (k) 1 − Fi j (k) ⎭
j=1

1, x ≥ 0
where U (x) = .
0, x < 0
6.7.6.4 Detection of Malfunction of Multichannel Equipment
The malfunction detection of all multichannel equipment is carried out similarly to

the detection of the improper operation of a separate processor (Fig. 6.15).
The solution d(k) is the fusion of the solutions d i (k) (i = 1, …, N) from the
detectors of N processors. The rule of fusion solutions for equipment in general is
& 'di (k) & '(1−di (k))
4N
1 − D̂i (k) D̂i (k)
d(k) = 1 at ≥ t (k)
i=1
Fi (k) 1 − Fi (k)
& 'di (k) & '(1−di (k))
4M
1 − D̂i (k) D̂i (k)
d(k) = 0 at < t (k) (6.141)
i=1
Fi (k) 1 − Fi (k)
where t(k) is the threshold of the minimum risk criterion for multichannel avionics.
The effectiveness of the detector is determined by the probabilities of false alarm
and incorrect detection, which can be calculated as a function of the probabilistic
Fig. 6.15 Multichannel

equipment malfunction
detection
characteristics of the processor detectors:

&
1 1 4
N
F(k) = ... Fi (k)di (k) [1 − Fi (k)][1−di (k)]
d1 (k)=0 d N (k)=0 i=1
⎧ & 'di (k) & '[1−di (k)] ⎫
⎨4 M
1 − D̂i (k) D̂i (k) ⎬
×U − t (k)
⎩ Fi (k) 1 − Fi (k) ⎭
j=1
& N
1 1 4 di (k)
D̂(k) = 1 − ... 1 − D̂i (k) D̂i (k)[1−di (k)]
d1 (k)=0 d N (k)=0 i=1
⎧ & 'di (k) & '[1−di (k)] ⎫
⎨4 M
1 − D̂i (k) D̂i (k) ⎬
×U − t (k)
⎩ Fi (k) 1 − Fi (k) ⎭
j=1
The simulation results of detecting a disorder in evaluating one parameter in four

processors show [165] that even at high values D̂i (k) (of the order of 0.45) for each
processor, the probability of incorrect detection in a multichannel system as a result
of fusion solutions decreases to 0.1. At the same time, the probability of a false alarm
also decreases, although not significantly (from 0.1 to 0.05). Further improvement
in performance can be achieved by improving detection algorithms, for example, by
removing the condition of independence of disorders in processors and taking into
account their correlation, or by using algorithms for stable signal detection [28].
6.8 The Structure of CPI Integrated Avionics Algorithms

with Detection and Localization of Hardware
and Information Failures
The implementation of CPI algorithms airborne an aircraft requires the development

of software for airborne computing devices, the most important part of which are
programs that make it possible to obtain statistically reliable estimates of aircraft
navigation parameters based on measurement results. The limited speed, the length of
the discharge grid and the memory capacity of the airborne computers, along with the
large number of problems solved in them, do not allow to fully implement the optimal
algorithms. Therefore, an urgent task is the development of simplified suboptimal
filtering algorithms, which, at the cost of a slight deterioration in the estimation
accuracy, can significantly reduce the computational costs of their implementation.
To implement the data processing algorithms in the FNC, it is necessary to have
information about the dynamics of the system, i.e., know the equation of state. In
addition, the equation between the elements of the state vector and the parameters
measured by different systems should be known. In most practical applications, one
of the equations of state or observation is nonlinear.
A significant reduction in computational costs can be achieved through the rational

construction of the CPI algorithm. It is well known, for example, that the costs of
implementing the Kalman filter algorithm are proportional to the third degree of the
state vector dimension. Therefore, during the synthesis of the CPI algorithm, the
minimum possible number of parameters should be included in the state vector. The
algorithm of reduced order can be obtained as a result of the reduction of the original
full-size algorithm. At the same time, it is necessary to choose the state vector of the
reduced algorithm in such a way that, for a given filter dimension, to obtain the best
estimates of the output parameters.
Important in the development of CPI algorithms is the choice of the basic coor-
dinate system. The use of such a coordinate system as a basis for CPI, in which the
equation of state is linear, makes it possible to use for the integration of information
of equipment included in the FNC, identical in structure, algorithms implemented
in the airborne computer in the form of the same software modules. The difference
between the algorithms in this case will be in the values of some constants and
in the specific formulas of coordinate transformations relating the navigation and
information parameters.
In modern FNC, the main functions of the CPI filter system are as follows:
• integrated data processing of navigation sensors and parameters of sensor models,
the formation of output navigation and landing parameters with the required
characteristics;
• integrated data processing of navigation sensors in order to solve the problems of
monitoring and diagnostics.
There are several possible approaches to building a CPI filter system. The most
common are two approaches:
• processing of measurements in one full-size filter;
• processing measurements in two or more federated filters.
In the first case, a full-size filter provides the greatest accuracy of parameter
estimates, provided that all sensors operate in accordance with their statistical models.
However, there are several reasons why a single half-size filter is rarely used:
• Due to differences in the nominal accuracy characteristics of sensors, the increase
in the accuracy of navigation definitions from the combined processing of less
accurate measurements with more accurate measurements is insignificant.
• Filter characteristics deteriorate when jointly processing the readings of sensors
with operable and inoperable states.
Theoretically, it is possible to detect and localize sensor failures in a full-size filter.
The restoration of the working state of the filter is performed by returning back several
cycles and repeating the calculations with correct data. Such an implementation
requires a large memory capacity for storing measurement vectors, correlation and
transition matrices, as well as a calculator performance reserve for fast recovery of
the measurement processing process.
6.8 The Structure of CPI Integrated Avionics Algorithms … 373
The federated structure contains several local filters that operate in parallel and
perform preliminary filtering and compression of data from sensors. The output data
of the local filters goes to the main filters, which coprocess the data of various sensors.
The majority of sensor failures are determined in local filters, which makes it possible
to ensure the failure of the solution of the state parameter estimation problem.
When using a federated structure with two main filters, much smaller memory
capacity and performance may be needed to restore the processing process in case
of sensor failures than in the case of a single large filter. If, nevertheless, continuous
support for the operation of several main filters requires too large resources in terms
of memory and performance, then the federated structure can be organized so that at
each moment in time there is only one main filter that provides the highest accuracy of
navigation definitions. In the event of a sensor failure, the data of which is processed
in the main filter, the other main filter is initialized, which processes the data of
the remaining operational sensors and provides the highest accuracy of navigation
determinations.
Another variant of the federal structure is the following construction of the
CPI system. In the structure of the program complex, local filters are constantly
working and the parallel operation of two or more main complex filters is maintained,
processing measurements that arrive at the current time from the most accurate radio
system together with data from the most accurate autonomous non-radio meter (the
main filter)) and from the stand-alone autonomous meter (parallel filter). At the same
time, estimates of the state parameters formed in one of the main filters are given to
external consumers, and the estimates formed in the second main filter are used if the
main autonomous meter (usually the INS) has failed. To implement such a structure,
it is necessary to use the majority principle of the choice of radio data. The main
advantages of this structure are as follows:
• high accuracy of forming estimates of state parameters, approaching the accuracy
achieved in a full-size filter;
• no abrupt changes in the parameter estimates in case of failures or failures of
autonomous meters;
• ease of software implementation.
The generalized diagrams of the three considered structures of the CPI filter system
are presented in Figs. 6.16, 6.17 and 6.18, respectively.
In the calculator of integrated avionics, it is advisable to apply the federated
structure of CPI filters with several main filters. To ensure the fault tolerance of the
CPI algorithm, a control device (CD) is introduced into the channel of each sensor,
which carries out the instrumental control of the sensor and the violation detection
algorithm (VDA), which operates, for example, as described in Sect. 6.7.4. In its
work, this algorithm uses complex filtering estimates obtained from the output of
CPI algorithms (Fig. 6.19). When failures are detected in accordance with the selected
criterion, a corresponding fault signal is generated, which enters the fault generation
algorithm of the entire integrated avionics system (clause 6.7.6). Depending on the
nature of the detected failures, data from individual navigation meters can be used in
different ways: either disconnect from the input of the CPI algorithm by specifying
Fig. 6.16 Structure of the Sign

CPI algorithm with a single of reliability
Radio sensor 1
common filter
…
Radio sensor N Complex
parameter
SPI filter estimates
Sign
of readiness
Standalone sensor 1
…
Standalone sensor M
Radio sensor 1 Local filter 1 SPI filter 1

Complex
…
parameter
estimates
Radio sensor N Local filter N
…
Standalone sensor 1 Local filter

N+1
…
Standalone sensor М Local filter SPI filter К

N+M Complex
parameter
estimates
Fig. 6.17 CPI algorithm structure with federated filters
the corresponding values of the transfer coefficients of local filters, or estimate the
bias in the VDA and compensate for output data shifts.
The model of combined reports considered in this chapter allows you to synthe-
size algorithms for detecting and evaluating violations that occur without using
complexing of heterogeneous navigation sensors. The basis for the synthesis of such
algorithms is the hypothesis of stationarity of the state and observation models.
Failure detection is based on monitoring the properties of the filter update process,
consistent with the model of a properly functioning navigation sensor. With this
approach, the processing of measuring information is carried out separately for
Radio sensor 1 Local filter 1
… Majority choice
…
and preprocessing
Radio sensor N Local filter N
Complex
Standalone sensor 1 Local filter parameter
N+1 SPI filter 1 estimates
Majority choice
…
…
and preprocessing
SPI filter 2
Standalone sensor М Local filter
N+M
Fig. 6.18 Structure of the CPI algorithm with parallel filters
Radio sensor 1 Local

filter 1
CD 1 SPI filter
VDA 1 …
…
Signal
failure
…
shaping
Radio sensor N Local
algorithm
filter N
CD N VDA N
Fig. 6.19 Structure of the algorithm of complex fault-tolerant information processing (only one
main CPI filter is shown)
each sensor in the corresponding coordinate system: MLS/DME—in the polar local
coordinate system, GNSS—in a rectangular geocentric or orthodromic, INS—in a
rectangular local coordinate system.
The use of complex assessments of navigation parameters, sensor status matrices
together with the specified autonomous procedure for detecting failures of individual
sensors, allows to remove the limitations associated with the stationarity of models
and provides the possibility of not only identifying the changes taking place (dynamic
changes or failures in the observation channel), but also determining failure (e.g.,
airborne meter or beacon).
Identification of changes allows you to build adaptive data processing algorithms
that compensate for displacements in measurements. In this case, measurements of
heterogeneous airborne sensors supplied to the main filter are “cleared” from errors
caused by failures, or are completely turned off.
Of the many navigation sensors that make up the integrated avionics and navi-
gation sensors that are not part of this equipment, but are included in the FNC,
17 possible combinations for navigation modes and eight combinations for landing
modes were selected. Table 6.2 shows the composition of sensors for navigation
modes, designated N1, …, N17, and the composition of sensors for landing modes,
designated L1, …, L8. Navigation modes are arranged in accordance with the accu-
racy of determining navigation parameters. When flying along a route, the choice of
navigation mode is made according to the criterion of achieving the highest accuracy
of navigation determinations that meets the needs of the flight phase. Landing modes
are arranged in accordance with the availability of ground-based landing aids and
autonomous sensors used. In the event of a failure of the landing means sensors,
provision is made for the reservation of landing modes by navigation sensors based
on the recalculation of the navigation parameters in the landing parameters. When
information from several radiotechnical systems is received simultaneously, the most
accurate information is used to obtain estimates of aircraft coordinates. Based on the
developed estimates of aircraft coordinates, one can obtain an estimate of systematic
measurement errors of less accurate systems. In the case of the disappearance of
information from a more accurate system, measurements of a less accurate system
with a corrected systematic error are processed.
For integrated avionics in the structure of the federal algorithm (Fig. 6.20), we
can distinguish five main filters (four navigation and one landing), depending on the
composition of the sensors used. The INS/GNSS filter is a normal GNSS filter using
autonomous data. When solving the problem of estimating and compensating for
Table 6.2 Composition of sensors for navigation and landing modes

Navigation mode Landing mode
Designation Sensor composition Designation Sensor composition
N1 IRS/GNSS L1 IRS/GLS
N2 IRS/RSBN multi-range L2 IRS/MLS/DME
N3 IRS/DME multi-range L3 IRS/ILS
N4 IRS/RSBN L4 IRS/PRMG
N5 IRS/VOR/DME L5 GLS
N6 ADS/GNSS L6 MLS/DME
N7 ADS/RSBN multi-range L7 ILS
N8 ADS/DME multi-range L8 PRMG
N9 ADS/RSBN
N10 ADS/VOR/DME
N11 GNSS
N12 RSBN multi-range
N13 DME multi-range
N14 RSBN
N15 VOR/DME
N16 IRS
N17 ADS
Local filter
IRS
IRS/GNSS
VDB data filter
GNSS
RSBN sign of reliability
Local filter
RSBN
IRS/RSBN
VOR sign of reliability IRS/VOR/DME
Local filter
VOR
DME sign of reliability
Local filter
DME
ADS/GNSS
ADS sign of reliability filter
Local filter
ADS
MLS sign of reliability
Local filter
MLS ADS/RSBN
ADS/VOR/DME
ILS sign of reliability
Local filter
ILS
RA sign of reliability IRS/MLS/DME

IRS/ILS
Local filter
RA
Fig. 6.20 Block diagram of the federated algorithm of integrated avionics
systematic error in local filters, a structure with simultaneous processing of informa-

tion from several radio engineering systems can be used as a variant of constructing
the algorithm. Such an approach is described in detail in Sects. 6.7.4 and 6.7.5.
References
1. Mesarovich M, Mako D, Takahara I (1973) Teoriya ierarhicheskih mnogourov-nevyh sistem.

Mir, Moscow, 344 s
2. Borisov AN, Alekseev AV, Merkur’eva GV et al (1989) Obrabotka nechetkoj informacii v
sistemah prinyatiya reshenij. Radio i svyaz, Moscow, 304 s
3. Ajvazyan SA, Enyukov IS, Meshalkin LD (1983) Prikladnaya statistika: Osnovy
modelirovaniya i pervichnaya obrabot-ka dannyh. Spravochnoe izd. Finansy i statistika,
Moscow, 471 s
4. Kuznecov VP (1991) Interval’nye statisticheskie modeli. Radio i svyaz, Moscow, 352 s
5. De Grot M (1974) Optimal’nye statisticheskie resheniya. Per. s angl. Pod red Linnika YUV.
Mir, Moscow, 491 s
6. Kalmykov SA, SHokin YUI, YUldashev ZH (1986) Metody interval’nogo ana-liza. Nauka,
Novosibirsk, 224 s
7. Alefel’d G, Hercberger YU (1987) Vvedenie v interval’nye vychisleniya. Per. s angl. Mir,
Moscow, 360 s
8. Zade LA (1976) Ponyatie lingvisticheskoj peremennoj i ego primenenie k prinyatiyu
priblizhennyh reshenij. Mir, Moscow, 168 s
9. Dubois D, Prade H (1980) Fuzzy sets and systems: theory and applications. Academic Press,
New York, 394 p
10. Nechetkie mnozhestva i teoriya vozmozhnostej (1986). Poslednie dostizheniya: Per. s angl.
Pod red. Agera RRY. Radio i svyaz, Moscow, 408 s
11. Shafer G (1976) A mathematical theory of evidence. Princeton University Press, Princeton
12. Passino KM, Yurkovith S (1998) Fuzzy control. Addison Wesley, Boston
13. Har’kov VP, SHevnin OA (1996) Integrirovannye sistemy upravleniya po-letom
LA povyshennoj otkazobezopasnosti. Radiosistemy 17:114–120 (ZHurnal v zhurnale
«Radiotekhnika». 1996. №9)
14. Melihov AN, Bernshtejn LS, Korovin SYA (1990) Situacionnye sovetuyu-shchie sistemy s
nechetkoj logikoj. Nauka, Moscow
15. Bortovaya operativno-sovetuyushchaya ekspertnaya sistema dlya pomoshchi letchiku pri
prinyatii takticheskih reshenij na nachal’nom etape pere-hvata vozdushnyh celej (1998). NTI
«Aviacionnye sistemy». NIC Gos-NIIAS, №1
16. Asai K, Vataba D, Ivai S et al (1993) Prikladnye nechetkie sistemy: Per. s yapon. Pod red.
Terano T, Asai K, Sugeno M. Mir, Moscow, 386 s
17. Bezdec JC (1987) Analysis of fuzzy information. CDC Press
18. Pal SK, King RA, Hashimi AA (1983) Image description and primitive extraction using fuzzy
sets. IEEE Trans SMC 13(1):94–100
19. Gesu Di V, Maccarone MC (1986) Feature selection and possibility theory. Pattern Recogn
19(1):63–72
20. Hirota, Arai, Hatisi (1986) Raspoznavanie dvizhushchihsya celej s pomoshch’yu nechetkoj
logiki i robot dlya peremeshcheniya dvizhushchihsya predmetov. Sb. trudov Vtorogo
nacional’nogo simpoziuma po nechetkim sistemam. IFSA, To-kio, S 15–22
21. Buravlev AI, Krasnov AM, Moiseev AG, Pasekunov IV (1996) Osnovy kon-cepcii
postroeniya integrirovannyh interaktivnyh kompleksov avia-cionnogo vooruzheniya. Radio-
sistemy 17:70–74. (ZHur-nal v zhurnale «Radiotekhnika». 1996. №9)
22. Aleksandrov AD, Andreev VP, Kejn VM et al (1983) Sistemy cifrovogo upravleniya
samoletom. Pod red. Aleksandrova AD, Fedorova SM. Mashinostroenie, Moscow, 223 s
23. Intellektual’nye sistemy avtomaticheskogo upravleniya (2001). Pod red. Makarova IM,
Lohina VM. Fizmatlit, Moscow, 576 s
24. Boguslavskij IA (1983) Prikladnye zadachi fil’tracii i upravleniya. Nauka, Moscow, 400 s
25. Fel’dbaum AA (1966) Osnovy teorii optimal’nyh avtomaticheskih sistem. Nauka, Moscow,
623 s
26. Krasovskij NN (1968) Teoriya upravleniya dvizheniem. Nauka, Moscow
References 379
27. Levin BR, SHvarc V (1985) Veroyatnostnye modeli i metody v sistemah svya-zi i upravleniya.
Radio i svyaz, Moscow, 312 s
28. Bogdanovich VA, Vostrecov AG (2003) Teoriya ustojchivogo obnaruzheniya, raz-licheniya i
ocenivaniya signalov. Fizmatlit, Moscow, 320 s
29. Bogdanovich VA, Groshev AYA (2002) Robastnoe obnaruzhenie signalov. Asimptoticheskij
podhod. SPb.: OAO «Radioavionika», 113 s
30. Kulikov EI, Trifonov AP (1978) Ocenka parametrov signalov na fone po-mekh. Sov.radio,
Moscow, 296 s
31. Repin VG, Tartakovskij GP (1977) Statisticheskij sintez pri apriornoj neopredelennosti i
adaptaciya informacionnyh sistem. Sov.radio, Moscow, 432 s
32. Paholkov GA, Zbrickaya GE, Krivoruchko YUT, Ponomarenko BV, SHatrakov YUG (1992)
Obrabotka signalov v radiotekhnicheskih sistemah blizhnej navigacii. Radio i svyaz, Moscow,
256 s
33. Akimov PS, Bakut PA, Bogdanovich VA et al (1984) Teoriya obnaruzheniya signalov. Pod
red. Bakuta PA. Radio i svyaz, Moscow, 440 s
34. Leman E (1979) Proverka statisticheskih gipotez. Per. s angl. Prohorova YUV. Nauka,
Moscow, 498 s
35. Levin BR (1989) Teoreticheskie osnovy statisticheskoj radiotekhniki. 3-e izd., pererab. i dop.
36. H’yuber Dzh P (1984) Robastnost’ v statistike. Per. s angl. Pod red. Hurbenko IGZ. Mir,
Moscow, 304 s
37. Hampel’ F, Ronchetti E, Rausseu P, SHtael’ V (1989) Robastnost’ v statisti-ke: Podhod na
osnove funkcij vliyaniya. Per. s angl. Pod red. Zolotareva VM. Mir, Moscow, 512 s
38. Ershov AA (1979) Stabil’nye metody ocenki parametrov: Obzor. Avtomatika i telemekhanika
(8):66–100
39. Krasnenker VM (1980) Stabil’nye metody obnaruzheniya signalov na fone pomekh: Obzor.
Avtomatika i telemekhanika (5):65–88
40. Kassam SA, Pur GV (1985) Robastnye metody obrabotki signalov: Obzor. TIIER 73(3):54–
110
41. SHahgil’dyan VV, Lohvickij MS (1974) Metody adaptivnogo priema signa-lov. Svyaz,
Moscow, 160 s
42. Pervachev SV, Perov AI (1991) Adaptivnaya fil’traciya soobshchenij. Radio i svyaz, Moscow,
160 s
43. Ajvazyan SA, Bezhaeva ZI, Staroverov OV (1974) Klassifikaciya mnogo-mernyh nablyudenij.
Statistika, Moscow, 240 s
44. Dorofeyuk AA (1971) Algoritmy avtomaticheskoj klassifikacii (obzor). Avtomatika i tele-
mekhanika (12):78–112
45. Klassifikaciya i klaster (1980). Pod red. Ven Rajzina D. Per. s angl. Mir, Moscow, 390 s
46. Milen’kij AV (1975) Klassifikaciya signalov v usloviyah neopredelenno-sti (Statisticheskie
metody samoobucheniya v raspoznavanii obrazov). Sov.radio, Moscow, 328 s
47. Tu D, Gonsales R (1978) Principy raspoznavaniya obrazov. Per. s angl. Mir, Moscow, 411 s
48. Fukunaga K (1979) Vvedenie v statisticheskuyu teoriyu raspoznavaniya obrazov. Per. s angl.
Nauka, Moscow, 368 s
49. Sejdzh EP, Melsa DL (1974) Identifikaciya sistem upravleniya. Nauka, Moscow, 248 s
50. Sovremennye metody identifikacii sistem (1983). Pod red. Ejkkhoffa P. Mir, Moscow, 400 s
51. Medvedev AV (1983) Neparametricheskie sistemy adaptacii. Nauka, Novosibirsk, 174 s
52. Cypkin YAZ (1984) Osnovy informacionnoj teorii identifikacii. Nauka, Moscow, 320 s
53. Malyutin YUM, Ekalo AV (1988) Primenenie EVM dlya resheniya zadach iden-tifikacii
ob’ektov. Izd-vo Leningr. un-ta, 256 s
54. Cypkin YAZ (1970) Osnovy teorii obuchayushchihsya sistem. Nauka, Moscow
55. Sragovich VG (1976) Teoriya adaptivnyh sistem. Nauka, Moscow, 320 s
56. Sragovich VG (1981) Adaptivnoe upravlenie. Nauka, Moscow, 384 s
57. Fomin VN, Fradkov AL, YAkubovich VA (1981) Adaptivnoe upravlenie dina-micheskimi
sistemami. Nauka, Moscow, 448 s
58. Gricenko NS, Gusarov AI, Loginov VP, Sevost’yanov KK (1983) Adaptivnoe ocenivanie.
CH.1. Zarubezhnaya radioelektronika (7):3–27
59. Gricenko NS, Loginov VP, Sevost’yanov KK (1985) Adaptivnoe ocenivanie. CH.2. Zarubezh-
naya radioelektronika (3):3–26
60. Fil’traciya i stohasticheskoe upravlenie v dinamicheskih sistemah. Pod red. Leondesa KT.
Per. s angl. Mir, Moscow, 407 s
61. Fomin VN (1984) Rekurrentnoe ocenivanie i adaptivnaya fil’traciya. Nauka, Moscow, 228 s
62. YArlykov MS, Mironov MA (1993) Markovskaya teoriya ocenivaniya sluchajnyh processov.
63. Derusso P, Roj R, Klouz CH (1970) Prostranstvo sostoyanij v teorii upravle-niya. Per. s angl.
64. Stratonovich RL (1973) Principy adaptivnogo priema. Sov.radio, Moscow, 144 s
65. Stratonovich RL (1966) Uslovnye markovskie processy i ih primenenie k teorii optimal’nogo
upravleniya. MGU, Moscow, 319 s
66. Lipcer RSH, SHiryaev AN (1974) Statistika sluchajnyh processov. Nauka, Moscow, 696 s
67. Tihonov VI, Kul’man NK (1975) Nelinejnaya fil’traciya i kvazikogerent-nyj priem signalov.
Sov.radio, Moscow, 704 s
68. Sejdzh E, Melsa D (1976) Teoriya ocenivaniya i ee primenenie v svyazi i upravlenii. Per. s
angl. Pod red. Levina BR. Svyaz, Moscow, 496 s
69. Tihonov VI (1983) Razvitie v SSSR teorii optimal’noj fil’tracii so-obshchenij. Radiotekhnika
(11)
70. Tihonov VI (1999) Razvitie v Rossii optimal’nogo nelinejnogo oceniva-niya sluchajnyh
processov i polej (obzor). Radiotekhnika (10):4–20
71. Markovskaya teoriya ocenivaniya v radiotekhnike (2004). Pod red. Arlykova MSY.
«Radiotekhnika», 504 s
72. Nevel’son NB, Has’minskij RZ (1972) Stohasticheskaya approksimaciya i re-kurrentnoe
ocenivanie. Nauka, Moscow, 304 s
73. Kurkin OM, Korobochkin YUB, SHatalov SA (1990) Minimaksnaya obrabotka informacii.
Energoatomizdat, Moscow, 216 s
74. Narin’yani AS (1986) Nedoopredelennost’ v sisteme predstavleniya i obra-botki znanij. Izv
AN SSSR Tekhn kibernetika (5):3–28
75. Kurzhanskij AB (1977) Upravlenie i nablyudenie v usloviyah neopredelenno-sti. Nauka,
Moscow, 392 s
76. Ahmedov RM, Bibutov AA, Vasil’ev AV et al (2004) Avtomatizirovannye sistemy upravleniya
vozdushnym dvizheniem: No-vye informacionnye tekhnologii v aviacii: Ucheb. posobie. Pod
red. Pyatko SG, Krasova AI. Politekhnika, SPb., 446 s
77. Krasovskij AA (1973) Sistemy avtomaticheskogo upravleniya poletom i ih analiticheskoe
konstruirovanie. Nauka, Moscow, 558 s
78. Fradkov AL (1990) Adaptivnoe upravlenie v slozhnyh sistemah: bespoisko-vye metody.
Nauka, Moscow
79. Kusimov ST, Il’yasov BG, Vasil’ev VI et al (1998) Upravlenie dinamicheskimi sistemami v
usloviyah neopredelennosti. Nauka, Moscow, 452 s
80. Gurevich OS, Gol’berg FD, Selivanov OD (1993) Integrirovannoe uprav-lenie silovoj
ustanovkoj mnogorezhimnogo samoleta. Mashino-stroenie, Moscow, 304 s
81. Identifikaciya sistem upravleniya aviacionnyh gazoturbinnyh dvi-gatelej. Pod red. Dedesha
VT. Mashinostroenie, Moscow, 200 s
82. Ajvazyan SA, Buhshtaber VM, Enyukov IS, Meshalkin LD (1989) Prikladnaya matematika:
Klassifikaciya i snizhenie razmernosti: Sprav. izd. Pod red. Ajvazyana SA. Finansy i statistika,
Moscow, 607 s
83. Metody analiza dannyh: Podhod, osnovannyj na metode dinamicheskih sgushchenij: Per. s
fr. Kol. avt. pod ruk. Dide E; Pod red. i s predisl. Ajvazyana SA, Buhshtabera VM. Finansy i
statistika, Moscow, 357 s
84. Bakut PA, ZHulina YUV, Ivanchuk NA (1980) Obnaruzhenie dvizhushchihsya ob’-ektov. Pod
red. Bakuta PA. Sov.radio, Moscow, 288 s
References 381
85. Kuz’min SZ (1974) Osnovy teorii cifrovoj obrabotki radiolokacionnoj informacii. Sov.radio,
Moscow, 432 s
86. Dmitriev SP, Kolesov NV, Osipov AV (2003) Nadezhnost’ navigacionnoj sistemy s uchetom
informacionnyh otkazov. X Sankt-Peterburgskaya mezhd. konferenciya po integrirovannym
navigacionnym sistemam. 26–28 maya 2003g
87. YArlykov MS (1985) Statisticheskaya teoriya radionavigacii. Radio i svyaz, Moscow, 344 s
88. Babich OA (1991) Obrabotka informacii v navigacionnyh kompleksah. Mashinostroenie,
Moscow, 512 s
89. ZHukovskij AP, Rastorguev VV (1998) Kompleksnye radiosistemy naviga-cii i upravleniya
samoletov. Izd-vo MAI, Moscow, 266 s
90. Waltz E, Llinas J (1990) Multisensor data fusion. Artech House, Norwood, MA
91. Brooks RR, Iyengar SS (1998) Multiple-sensor fusion—fundamentals and appli-cations with
software. Prentice Hall, N.J.
92. Grossman P (1998) Multisensor data fusion. GEC J Technol 15(1):27–37
93. Doule RS, Harris CJ (1996) Multisensor data fusion for helicopter guidance using neurofuzzy
estimation algorithms. Proc Roy Aero Soc J
94. Solov’ev YUA (2000) Sistemy sputnikovoj navigacii. Eko-Trendz, Moscow, 268 s
95. Solov’ev YUA (2003) Sputnikovaya navigaciya i ee prilozheniya. Eko-Trendz, Moscow, 326
s
96. Ivanov YUP (1988) Kompleksnaya fil’traciya i klassifikaciya signalov. Izd-vo Leningr. un-ta,
212 s
97. Kazarinov YUM, Sokolov AI, YUrchenko YUS (1985) Proektirovanie ustrojstv fil’tracii
radiosignalov. Izd-vo Leningr. un-ta, 160 s
98. Efanov VN, Bodrunov SD (2004) Otkrytye arhitektury v koncepcii avio-niki pyatogo
pokoleniya. Mir avioniki (5):20–28
99. Bakut PA, Bol’shakov IA, Gerasimov BM et al. Voprosy statisticheskoj teorii radiolokacii.
Pod red. Tartakovskogo GP. Sov.radio, Moscow, 1963-T.1.-426 s; 1964-T.2.-1079 s
100. Loginov VP. Priblizhennye algoritmy nelinejnoj fil’tracii. Zarubezhnaya radioelektronika
(2):CH.1-S.28–48 (1975); (3):CH.2.-S.3–28 (1976)
101. Alspach DL, Sorenson HW (1971) Recursive Bayessian estimation using Gaussian sum
approximations. Automatica 7(4)
102. Kuznecov VP, CHurakov EP (1975) Metod poligaussovskoj approksimacii v zadache
postroeniya optimal’noj diskretnoj sistemy. Avtomatika i telemekhanika 9:52–58
103. Trofimov AT (1986) Ocenivanie meshayushchih parametrov dlya adaptivnoj obrabotki
signalov na osnove ispol’zovaniya poligaussovskoj modeli pomekh. Radiotekhnika i elek-
tronika XXXI(11):2151–2159
104. CHabdarov SHM, Trofimov AT (1975) Poligaussovy predstavleniya proiz-vol’nyh pomekh i
priem diskretnyh signalov. Radiotekhnika i elektro-nika XX(4):734–745
105. Alspach DL, Sorenson HW (1972) Nonlinear Bayessian estimation using Gaussian sum
approximations. IEEE Trans Aerosp Electron Syst AC-17(4):439–448
106. Tihonov VI, Harisov VN (1991) Statisticheskij analiz i sintez radiotekh-nicheskih ustrojstv i
sistem. Radio i svyaz, Moscow, 608 s
107. Mironov MA (1982) Polimodal’nost’ aposteriornogo raspredeleniya v za-dachah optimal’noj
nelinejnoj fil’tracii. Radiotekhnika i elektro-nika. XXVI(7):1342–1351
108. Stepanov OA (1998) Primenenie teorii nelinejnoj fil’tracii v zadachah obrabotki navigacionnoj
informacii. GNC RF-CNII «Elek-tropribor», SPb, 370 s
109. Perov AI (1987) Kvazioptimal’naya analogo-diskretnaya fil’traciya im-pul’snyh signalov s
gruppirovaniem. Radiotekhnika i elektronika. XXXII(10):2117–2123
110. Perov AI (1987) Optimal’naya linejnaya diskretnaya fil’traciya s gruppiro-vaniem. Izv vuzov
SSSR Ser Radioelektronika 30(7):39–45
111. Harisov VN, Efendiev RN (1989) Algoritmy nelinejnoj fil’tracii s gruppirovaniem nablyu-
denij. Izv vuzov SSSR Ser Radioelektronika 32(8):29–33
112. Bar-Shalom Y (1972) Redundancy and data compression in recursive estimation. IEEE Trans
AC-17(5):684–689
113. Katikov VM (1976) Optimizaciya impul’snyh sledyashchih izmeritelej pri re-gulyarnyh

pereryvah v prinimaemom signale. Izv. vuzov SSSR Ser Radioelektronika 19(7):26–32
114. Kazarinov YUM, Sokolov AI (1978) Ocenka sostoyaniya dinamicheskih ob’ek-tov pri
regulyarnyh pereryvah v prinimaemom signale. Izv vuzov SSSR Ser Radioelektronika
21(5):50–54
115. Sokolov AI (1978) Posledovatel’noe sglazhivanie pri peremennom inter-vale diskretizacii. V
kn.: Izvestiya LETI 229:28–31
116. Sokolov AI (1978) Optimizaciya impul’snyh sistem s konechnym vremenem s’ema dannyh.
V kn.: Voprosy obrabotki signalov, Vyp 2, S 91–94
117. Sokolov AI (1977) Optimizaciya diskretnyh sledyashchih sistem v pachechnom rezhime. V
kn.: Izvestiya LETI, Vyp 213, S 36–40
118. Perov AI, Harisov VN (1996) Umen’shenie vychislitel’noj slozhnosti al-goritmov v priem-
nikah sputnikovyh radionavigacionnyh sistem na osnove kombinirovannoj kalmanovsko-
vinerovskoj fil’tracii. Radiotekhnika (1):120–125
119. Ponomarenko BV, Dobrohodov SB, Sokolov AI, YUrchenko YUS (1989) Ispol’zovanie
fil’trov s integral’nym vvodom dannyh v dal’nomer-nom kanale RSBN. Voprosy radioelek-
troniki Ser OVR 2:16–23
120. Lutchenko AE (1973) Kogerentnyj priem radionavigacionnyh signalov. Sov.radio, Moscow,
206 s
121. Kondrat’ev VS, Kotov AF, Markov LN (1986) Mnogopozicionnye radiotekhnicheskie
sistemy. Pod red. prof. Cvetnova VV. Radio i svyaz, Moscow, 264 s
122. Ponomarenko BV (1987) Ustojchivye algoritmy obrabotki radionavigacion-nyh signalov na
fone kompleksa pomekh. 6s. – Dep. v NIIEIR 4.05.87g, №3-8062
123. Polyak BT, Cypkin YAZ (1979) Adaptivnye algoritmy ocenivaniya (skhodi-most’,
optimal’nost’, stabil’nost’). Avtomatika i telemekhanika (3):71–84
124. Cypkin YAZ (1979) Adaptivnye algoritmy optimizacii pri apriornoj ne-opredelennosti.
Avtomatika i telemekhanika (6):94–108
125. Demidenko EZ (1981) Linejnaya i nelinejnaya regressiya. Finansy i sta-tistika, Moscow, 302
s
126. Mudrov VI, Kushko VL (1976) Metody obrabotki izmerenij. Sov.radio, Moscow, 192 s
127. Smolyak SA, Titarenko BP (1980) Ustojchivye metody ocenivaniya. Sta-tistika, Moscow, 208
s
128. Louson CH, Henson R (1986) CHislennoe reshenie zadach metoda naimen’shih kvadratov:
Per. s angl. Nauka, Moscow, 232 s
129. Stogov GV, Makshanov AV, Musaev AA (1982) Ustojchivye metody obrabotki rezul’tatov
izmerenij. Zarubezhnaya radioelektronika (9):3–46
130. Andrews DF, Bickel PJ, Hampel FREA (1972) Robust estimates of location. Survey and
advances. Princeton University Press, Princeton, 373 p
131. Polyak BT (1983) Vvedenie v optimizaciyu. Nauka, Moscow, 384 s
132. Ermakov SM, Brodskij VZ, ZHiglyavskij AA et al (1983) Matematicheskaya teoriya
planirovaniya eksperimenta. Pod red. Ermakova SM. Nauka, Moscow, 392 s
133. Ralston ML, Jennrich RI (1978) Dud, a derivative-free algorithm for nonlinear least squares.
Technometrics 20(1):7–14
grazhd. aviacii. Transport, Moscow
135. Statisticheskaya teoriya svyazi i ee prakticheskie prilozheniya. Pod red. Levina BR. Svyaz,
Moscow, 288 s
136. Zaks SH (1975) Teoriya statisticheskih vyvodov. Mir, Moscow, 776 s
137. Sklyar B (2003) Cifrovaya svyaz’. Teoreticheskie osnovy i prakticheskoe pri-menenie. Izd.
2-e, ispr.: Per. s angl. Izdatel’skij dom «Vil’yams», Moscow, 1104 s
138. Dmitriev SP, Stepanov OA (1998) Metody teorii nelinejnoj fil’tracii v zadachah obrabotki
navigacionnoj informacii. 5-ya S.-Peterburg. Mezhdunar. konf. po integrir. navigac. sistemam,
Sankt-Peterburg, 25–27 maya, 1998: Dokl. uchastnikov iz Rossii i Ukrainy.-SPb, 1998, S
99–110
References 383
139. Maksimov MV, Bobnev MP, Krivickij BH et al (1976) Zashchita ot radiopomekh. Pod red.
Maksimova MV. Sov. Radio, Moscow, 496 s
140. Gromov GN, Paholkov GA (1980) Principy organizacii kompleksov bortovo-go samo-
letnogo oborudovaniya, obespechivayushchih povyshenie effektiv-nosti i nadezhnosti resh-
eniya zadach navigacii, posadki i UVD. Voprosy radioelektroniki. Ser. OT, Vyp 4, S
3–15
141. Mironov MA, Prohorov SL (1996) Kompleksnye radionavigacionnye si-stemy s razdel’noj
obrabotkoj signalov. Radiotekhnika (1)
142. Integrirovannye inercial’no-sputnikovye sistemy navigacii. GNC RF – CNII «Elektropribor»,
SPb., 235 s
143. YArlykov MS, Bazarov AA (1991) Optimal’noe kompleksirovanie radiona-vigacionnyh
izmeritelej na urovne obrabotki signalov dlya kazhdogo iz nih. Radiotekhnika (5)
144. YArlykov MS, Bazarov AA (1992) Sovmeshchennaya apparatura potrebitelej sputnikovoj i
giperbolicheskoj radionavigacionnyh sistem. Radiotekhnika (4)
145. YArlykov MS, Bazarov AA, Salyamekh AA (1996) Pomekhoustojchivyj naviga-cionno-
posadochnyj kompleks na osnove sputnikovoj radionavigaci-onnoj sistemy. Radiotekhnika
(12)
146. YArlykov MS, CHizhov OP (1996) Suboptimal’nye algoritmy priema i kom-
pleksnoj obrabotki kvazikogerentnyh signalov sputnikovoj radiona-vigacionnoj sistemy.
Radiotekhnika (1)
147. YArlykov MS, Kudinov AT (1998) Povyshenie kachestva funkcionirovaniya sputnikovyh
radionavigacionnyh sistem za schet informacionnoj iz-bytochnosti. Radiotekhnika (2)
148. YArlykov MS, Prigonyuk ND (2001) Zahod na posadku i posadka samoletov po signalam
sputnikovyh radionavigacionnyh sistem. Radiotekhnika (1)
149. Orlov AI (1977) Problemy ustojchivosti i obosnovannosti reshenij v teo-rii ekspertnyh ocenok.
Statisticheskie metody analiza ekspertnyh ocenok. Nauka, Moscow
150. Grishin YUP, Kazarinov YUM (1985) Dinamicheskie sistemy, ustojchivye k otkazam. Radio
i svyaz, Moscow, 176 s
151. Hashemipour HR, Roy S, Laub AJ (1988) Decentralized structures for parallel Kalman
filtering. IEEE Trans Autom Control 33(1):88–94
152. Aoki M (1971) Optimizaciya stohasticheskih sistem. Nauka, Moscow, 424 s
153. Nikiforov IV (1983) Posledovatel’noe obnaruzhenie izmeneniya svojstv vremennyh ryadov.
154. Gertler J (1998) Fault detection and diagnosis in engineering systems. Marcel Dekker, NY
155. Bassvil’ M, Vilski A, Banvenist A et al (1989) Obnaruzhenie izmeneniya svojstv signalov i
dinamicheskih sistem: Per. s angl. Pod red. Bassvil M, Banvenista A. Mir, Moscow, 278 s
156. Basseville M, Nikiforov IV (1993) Detection of abrupt changes: theory and application.
Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
157. Grishin YUP (1984) Obnaruzhenie i ocenivanie skachkoobrazno izmenyayushchih-sya
parametrov diskretnyh sluchajnyh processov. Izv vuzov SSSR Radioelektronika 27(4):31–34
158. Grishin YUP, Vovk AI (1990) Sovmestnoe obnaruzhenie i ocenivanie skach-koobraznyh izme-
nenij parametrov gaussovskih markovskih posledova-tel’nostej. Izv vuzov SSSR Radioelek-
tronika 33(1):56–62
159. Vovk AI, Grishin YUP (1991) Obnaruzhenie momentov izmeneniya svojstv gaussovskih
markovskih posledovatel’nostej i ocenivanie ih para-metrov. Izv vuzov SSSR Radioelek-
tronika 34(7):53–56
160. Vovk AI, Grishin YUP (1996) Uluchshenie harakteristik celostnosti radio-navigacionnyh
sistem za schet kompleksnoj obrabotki dannyh na bortu letatel’nyh apparatov. Radiotekhnika
(8):3–5
161. Grishin YUP, Katikov VM (1977) Sovmestnoe obnaruzhenie i ocenivanie sluchajnyh signalov:
Obzor. Zarubezhnaya radioelektronika (6):3–25
162. Kirichenko AA, Kolomejceva TA, Loginov VP, Tihomirova IG (1981) Oce-nivanie vektora
sostoyaniya dinamicheskoj sistemy pri nalichii ano-mal’nyh izmerenij: Obzor. Zarubezhnaya
radioelektronika (12):3–23
163. Savaragi Y, Katayama T, Fujishige S (1971) Sequential state estimation with inter-rupted
observation. Inform Control 21(1):56–71
164. Ackerson GA, Fu KS (1970) On state estimation in switching environments. IEEE Trans
AC-15(1):10–17
165. Belcastro CM, Weinstein B (2002) Distributed detection with data fusion for mal-function
detection and isolation in fault tolerant flight control computers. In: Proceedings of the
American control conference, Anchorage AK, May 2002, pp 4224–4231
Chapter 7
Examples of Realization of Integrated
Avionics of Navigation, Landing, Data
Exchange and ATC
Currently, foreign firms produce a number of types of integrated airborne aviation

equipment. Information about it is periodically printed in the journal Aviation Week &
Space Technology. The greatest development was gained by the functional integration
of avionics complexes, instrumented by airborne computers and EDS. Examples of
such systems for civil aviation may be products of f. Honeywell Inc. (Primus 1000,
Primus 2000, Primus Epic, and others.) [1], in military aviation, navigation-sight
systems LANTIRN f.Lockheed Martin, Litening II f.Rafael (Israel) [2].
Let us consider in more detail the implementation of hardware-integrated avionics
of navigation, landing, data exchange and ATC. In the Primus complexes mentioned
above, Primus II radio equipment was used, first introduced by Honeywell on business
and regional aircraft in 1987 [2].
The Primus II radio equipment is controlled and displays its information via the
radio system bus, which is configured for radio equipment from the standard avionics
communication bus (ASCB) developed by f.Sperry. The system includes: the RM-
850 series full-color radio equipment control unit, the RNZ-850 series integrated
navigation device, the RCZ-851E integrated communication device and the AV-850
audio control device, electronic position indicators (EPI) and horizontal situation
indicators (EHSI), indicator DME; antennas of VOR, ILS, DME, MLS, ADF, marker,
communication, transponder.
The radio equipment control device provides control of operating modes, frequen-
cies and codes for all devices in the system. Five special windows support communi-
cation, navigation, transponder, ADF and MLS functions. The device also provides
control and information output of the built-in test equipment (BITE).
The integrated navigation device contains a navigation VHF receiver, DME
transceiver modules and an ADF receiver module. The VHF navigation receiver
performs the functions of a VOR receiver, course and glide ILS receivers and a marker
receiver to provide a landing approach for ILS category II. The DME transceiver
operates in 6-channel DME scanning mode, which simultaneously tracks the DME
channels and two selected navigation frequencies. It meets the accuracy requirements
of the P-DME specification’s initial approach mode better than 100 feet and can also
386 7 Examples of Realization of Integrated Avionics …
work on DME W, X, Y or Z channels. The extended range ADF module can receive
low-frequency drive radio beacon (NDB), as well as marine emergency stations in
the band from 2.181 MHz to 2.183 MHz.
The integrated communication device includes separate VHF modules of the
transceiver and the transponder. Additional transponder includes A/C and S mode.
The communication transceiver operates in the frequency range from 118 to
152 MHz; however, for civilian users, the upper limit can be reduced to 136 MHz.
The MLS receiver can function as an add-on to the integrated navigation device
and can be connected to standard digital and analog outputs.
A digital audio system receives digitized speech signals from other devices over a
single high-speed bus across each board, providing noise protection and virtual elim-
ination of cross-section distortion. Sixteen or more audio signals can be controlled,
and a few audio panels can be installed on the plane. They are available in three or
four versions, with a variety of locations.
Since 1998, modifications are available that provide the 8.33 kHz communication
bandwidth required for flights in the European region from January 1, 1999, as well
as updating tools for all existing Primus II radio equipment.
The Pro Line II avionics f.Rockwell Collins includes an integrated VIR-32/432
receiver that works with VOR, ILS systems and marker beacons. The Pro Line 21
avionics system of the same company includes an integrated NAV-4000 receiver,
which performs the avionics VOR, ILS, ADF and marker receiver functions [2].
For general aviation, f.Bendix / King (Allied Signal) has developed an integrated
KNS 80 Silver Crown navigation system. The KNS 80 contains a 200-channel VOR
/ ILS heading receiver, a 200-channel digital DME, a 40-channel glide path receiver
and a RNav digital computer that can store up to four VOR / ILS beacon frequences
and waypoints. Information is displayed on a full-width display on light-emitting
diodes, and the system can operate with a horizontal indicator or a course deviation
indicator.
An example of integration is the GNC 400 series of Garmin [3]. It includes the
following products installed on the dashboard and realizing navigation and VHF
communications functions: GNC 420BT; GNS 430 W; GNS 530 W; GTN 650/750;
GTN 625/725 and others.
The GPS receiver included in the listed products, together with the Jeppsen
database, provides route, terminal navigation and inaccurate approaches.
As indicated in Chapter 3, the adoption of ICAO in the 1990s, the concept of
simultaneous operation of three landing systems of airplanes led to the development
of standards for multi-mode landing equipment MMR (ARINC 755) and multi-mode
navigation landing equipment GNLU ( ARINC 756). At the same time, a number of
companies began developing this equipment.
Table 7.1 shows the technical characteristics of MMR and GNLU receivers [2,
4].
Several types of equipment (products of the GNLU-900 family, AN / ARN-155,
ANV-241, IKNP) from the table below are examples of the implementation of GNLU
in accordance with ARINC 756, but without performing the FMS function provided
in the ARINC specification 756.
Table 7.1 Technical characteristics of MMR and GNLU receivers
Model (fipma, ctpana) Functional tasks Interface Supply Dimensions, Weight, kg Operating temperature,
form-factor degree C
GLU-900 (Rockwell ILS, MLS (optional), ARINC 429 115 V AC, 400 Hz 3 MCU 3,9 −55 to +70
Collins, USA) GPS, GLS (optional)
GNLU-900 (Rockwell ILS, MLS, VOR, GPS, ARINC 429 29 V DC 4 MCU 7,3
Collins, USA) GLS
GNLU-910 (Rockwell ILS, MLS, VOR, GPS, ARINC 429
Collins,USA) GLS, FMS
Collins,USA) GLS
Collins,USA) GLS
GNLU-945 (Rockwell ILS, MLS, VOR, GPS, ARINC 429,
Collins,USA) GLS MIL-STD-1553B
7 Examples of Realization of Integrated Avionics …
RMA-55B (Honeywell, ILS, MLS (optional), ARINC 429 115 V AC, 400 Hz 3 MCU 4,4 −15 to +70
USA) GPS, GLS (optional)
AN/ARN-155 (BAE ILS, MLS, VOR ARINC 429, 248 × 127x91 4,5
Systems, USA) (optional), GLS MIL-STD-1553B mm
TLS-755 (Thales ILS, MLS, GPS, ARINC 429 115 V AC, 400 Hz 3 MCU 5,4 −55 to +70
Aerospace, France) GLONASS, EGNOS,
MSAS, GLS
ANV-241 (Marconi ILS, VOR, VDB ARINC 429, 127 × 95 × 4,5
SpA, Italy) (LAAS), MLS, GPS MIL-STD-1553B, 258 mm
(optional) analog signals
VIM-95 (Navigator JSC, ILS, VOR, marker ARINC 429, analog 27 V DC 57 × 194 × 3,5 −50 to +70
Russia) receiver signals 319 mm
(continued)
387
388
Model (fipma, ctpana) Functional tasks Interface Supply Dimensions, Weight, kg Operating temperature,
form-factor degree C
RSBN-85 V (Navigator RSBN, PRMG, GNSS ARINC 429 115 V AC, 400 Hz 90 × 194 × 10,0 −60 to +70
JSC, Russia) (GPS, GLONASS), 319 mm
MCD, «Rendezvous»
IRNS (Navigator JSC, GNSS (GPS, AFDX, ARINC 429 27 V DC 124 × 194 × 6,0 −50 to +70
Russia) GLONASS, GALILEO), 319 mm
VOR, ILS, MLS, GLS
(GBAS, MSAS,
EGNOS), marker
receiver, DME, ADF
7 Examples of Realization of Integrated Avionics … 389
Table 7.2 Distribution of functional tasks of the IRNS by flight phase

Functional Use of the IRNS in phases of flight
task Flight en route Flight and the airport and landing
Foreign Domestic Over Foreign Domestic Departmental
tracks tracks landless airfields airfields airfields
terain
Navigation
GNSS + + + + + +
mDME + + - - - -
VOR/DME + + - + + -
ADF + + + + + +
Landing
GLS - - - + + +
ILS - - - + + +
MLS - - - + - -
The development of the principle of implementing multi-mode navigation equip-

ment for meeting the requirements of CNS/ATM is the development of an integrated
radio navigation system IRNS (Navigator JSC, St. Petersburg) for advanced aircraft
GA.
The integrated equipment of the IRNS is intended to provide
• GNSS, VOR / DME, ADF navigation;
• receiving digital data on VDB from local monitoring and correcting stations of
the GNSS system;
• approach and landing on any of the systems ILS, MLS, GLS.
According to its functional tasks, the equipment of the IRNS is a combination of
MMR, corresponding to ARINC 755 and near-navigation equipment VOR, DME,
ADF automatic radio compass.
Technical characteristics of multi-mode landing and navigation receivers.
Table 7.2 shows the distribution of functional tasks of the IRNS by flight phase.
The GNSS receiver, which is part of the IRNS, operates for the entire flight.
Table 7.3 compares the functional tasks of the IRNS and the main devices included
in the CNS / ATM airborne equipment architecture, corresponding to ARINC 660A.
Several types of integrated navigation, landing, communications and identification
equipment are used on fighter aircraft of a number of foreign countries. On the
F/A-22 F. Lockheed Martin, an integrated ICNIA communications, navigation and
surveillance system is being used. The Rafal aircraft operates the SOCRAT multi-
mode navigation and landing equipment (TLS 20XX). The F-16 fighter has integrated
equipment INS/GPS of Honeywell [5, 6].
Of the equipment listed, the most unique and unparalleled in their architecture
and characteristics is ICNIA equipment, the development of which was started back
Table 7.3 Comparsion of the functional tasks of the IRNS and the main devices included in the
CNS/ATM airborne equipment architecture, corresponding to ARINC 660A
Functions GNU MMR GNLU INR Boeing IRNS
(ARINC760) (ARINC755) (ARINC756) 787
Navigation
GNSS + + + + +
VOR - - + + +
DME - - - - +
ADF - - - - +
Marker receiver - - - - +
Landing
ILS - + + + +
MLS - + + + +
GLS (GNSS + - + + + +
VDB)
PRMG - - - - +
in the 80s of the last century. This publication is described in numerous publications,
and reviews of which are given, in particular, in [7, 8].
The ICNIA program in the United States was a program of three services
conducted by the Air Force with partial participation of the army and Navy. ICNIA
configurations are designated as army terminal (ADM-1), aviation terminal (ADM-2)
and full functional terminal (ADM-3 and ADM-4). The ADM-1 terminal provided
reception, transmission, processing and control of a special set of CNI functions
for a laboratory demonstration and a later flight demonstration on an UH-60 Black
Hawk army helicopter. The ADM-2 was used to test software in the Ada language,
developed for the ATF aircraft, and was transferred to accommodate customers as a
workplace for RF testing and to support module recovery. The ADM-3 and ADM-4
terminals have been transferred to the Wright Laboratory‘s Avionics Directorate for
further laboratory testing, demonstration and development of the system. The ADM-
4 terminal was also used to demonstrate the functions of the Navy Link 4, Link 11
and FLTSATCOM.
The functions implemented in ICNIA are located in the range from 2 MHz to
2 GHz and are listed in Table. 7.4.
ICNIA was developed based on the use of redundancy, resource sharing, advanced
embedded control (BIT) and BIS technology for creating an architecture that enables
detection and isolation of failures at the LRM level and dynamic reconfiguration to
improve operational readiness.
ICNIA software also uses a modular concept. As new functions or requirements
become known, new software can be added to implement new functions or require-
ments in the ICNIA system so that the ICNIA software is reprogrammed. This
provides the ICNIA system with flexibility that could not be implemented in federated
structures. As a result, new functions can be added to a military system containing
Table 7.4 The functions implemented in ICNIA
№ Functions Army terminal ADM-1 Air Force terminal ADM-2 ADM-3 and ADM-4 terminal
1 Joint Tactical Information Distribution System (JTIDS) + +
2 Enhanced JTIDS (EJS) + +
3 Enhanced Position Locating and Reporting System (EPLRS) + +
4 Fast frequence hopping communication (Have Quick) + + +
5 Single Channel Ground-to-Air Radio System (SINCGARS) + + +
6 Identification system Mk12 + + +
7 Identification system Mk15 + + +
8 GPS + +
9 TACAN + + +
10 MLS
+ +
11 ILS + +
12 TCAS, transponder mode S + +
13 VOR + +
14 HF communication + +
15 UHF communication + +
16 VHF communication +
17 Link 4 communication +
18 Link 11 communication +
19 Fleet Satellite Communications (FLTSATCOM) +
391
ICNIA by upgrading software and without new hardware modifications. This saves
significant costs for the installation of a new equipment of the military system, which
was demonstrated, in particular, by adding marine functions.
The concept of ICNIA radio terminals makes it more reliable to use rapidly
emerging advanced radio frequency and digital technologies, providing pilots with
more readiness and flexibility of communication, navigation and recognition than
ever before. The creation of ICNIA has shown that the integrated terminal is capable
of supporting multiple failures or localizing failures, while at the same time satis-
fying the pilot’s requirements for different priorities of communication, navigation
and recognition functions throughout the entire time of the task. The savings achieved
were a 45–50% reduction in size and mass, with a corresponding decrease of 50–55%
in the life cycle cost [2].
Another example of the integration of military avionics in the framework of the
US state program is the creation of multifunctional integrated radio engineering
equipment MIRFS for the JSF joint strike fighter. Northrop Grumman has devel-
oped the concept of “integrated radio frequencies” (CIRF), which provides for the
integration of radio locators and electronic military communications, navigation and
surveillance equipment into an improved radio frequency environment of an open
architecture [2]. The system covers the ranges of VHF, UHF, L, S and C.
The development of MIRFS conceptually coincides with the ICNIA system, and
this equipment was planned before 2004 for operation on a JSF aircraft (F-35). In
connection with the problems of increasing the reliability that have arisen in similar
equipment during the testing of an F/A-22 aircraft, work is planned to enhance the
integration of the equipment of the JSF aircraft [9].
A key element of the MIRFS project is a new active electronic array with elec-
tron scanning, which should reduce the cost of the airborne avionics system of the
JSF aircraft by 30% and weight by 50%. The antenna is co-produced by Northrop
Grumman, Litton, Raytheon Electronics Systems, BAE Systems and Harris. The
antenna can support the AN/APG-77 radar tested on the F/A-22 and the COTS
emulator of the integrated CIP core processor.
The antenna array with multifunctional and multi-antenna antennas is integrated
in the form of an aperture structure and arranged so that the entire structure can be
mounted in the aircraft fuselage. Switching electronics is a highly integrated matrix
of radio frequency switches, power dividers and receiving amplifiers, which allows
for multi-user selection of each of the main antenna ranges. Resource management
is performed by a CIP processor. Its functions are to optimize the range coverage
and minimize interference.
The advanced avionics of the F/A-18E/F aircraft includes the MIDS multifunc-
tional digital communication and data distribution system [10]. The MIDS system
is designed to ensure the interaction of NATO combat aircraft with each other, with
the national rapid deployment forces and air defense during joint operations. The
system is based on terminals that are fully compatible with the JTIDS system over
messaging protocols and operation modes. MIDS thermals have a modular design
and an open architecture based on commercial standards and technologies, which
7 Examples of Realization of Integrated Avionics … 393
allows more than 2 times reduction in weight, 3 times in size and cost, as well as
increased functional reliability compared to JTIDS terminals.
References
1. Integrated Avionics Systems. Outlook /Specifications. Aviation Week @ Space Technology,

2004, January 19, pp 227–230
2. Jane‘s Avionics, 2000–2001; 2002–2003; 2003–2004, 2013–2014
3. 400 Series Installation Manual //Garmin International, Inc. 190-00140-02, Revision L,
December 2002
4. Baburov VI, Panov EA (2002) Realizaciya koncepcii CNS/ATM v Rossii. Mir avioniki 2:S24–
S26
5. Il’in V.E. Mnogocelevye istrebiteli zarubezhnyh stran. M.: Ast-rel’, AST (2000)
6. Il’in V.E. Boevye samolety zarubezhnyh stran XXI veka. M.: Astrel’, AST (2000)
7. Lukin VN, Mishchenko IN, Molochko SV (1987) Osnovnye napravleniya sozda-niya inte-
grirovannoj aviacionnoj bortovoj radioelektronnoj appa-ratury sistem svyazi, navigacii i
opoznavaniya v SSHA. Zarubezhnaya radioelektronika 8:S3–S22
8. Bochkarev AM, Strukov YP (1990) Bortovoe radioelektronnoe oborudovanie letatel’nyh
apparatov /Itogi nauki i tekhniki. Aviastroenie T.II. M
9. Fulghum DA, Wall R (2004) Escalation clause. Aviation Week @ Space Tech-nology, 2004,
March 22
10. Bobkov A (2004) Modernizaciya bortovogo radioelektronnogo oborudovaniya istrebitelej –
shturmovikov F/A-18E/F «Super-Hornet». Zarubezhnoe voennoe obozrenie 4:S68–S71
Conclusion
The integration of airborne avionics is an important direction in the development of

civil and military aircraft, which in recent decades has been mainly in the form of
practical work on the creation of samples of integrated equipment. The theory and
methodology of analytical synthesis of hardware-integrated avionics are still in its
infancy. The principles of avionics integration are, in many respects, heuristic, based
on system-wide representations and rich developer experience.
The spontaneous nature of the integration process is not conducive to the adop-
tion of optimal solutions when developing an integrated avionics. Therefore, it is
necessary to make efforts to develop theoretical methods of analysis and synthesis
of integrated avionics.
Despite the significant commonality of system approaches to the integration of
various types of airborne avionics, there is a specificity in their functioning that
must be taken into account when developing an integrated avionics architecture. In
particular, instrumental integration of avionics can be based on a multi-level model
of a team of information processing devices, which allows you to design and explore
integrated avionics as a distributed system of conveyor information processing in
real time.
Further formalization of the proposed model will make it possible to develop a
methodology for the synthesis of such structures, to create a unified approach to
the development of algorithms and software for integrated avionics and to develop
methods for calculating its characteristics.
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license 395
to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021
Technology, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-0897-1

5 Principles of Integrated Airborne Avionics 978-981!16!0897-1

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

5 Principles of Integrated Airborne Avionics 978-981!16!0897-1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Springer Aerospace Technology

Igor Victorovich Avtin

The series’ scope includes monographs, professional books, advanced textbooks,

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

Boris Victorovich Ponomarenko Yuri Grigorievich Shatrakov

ISSN 1869-1730 ISSN 1869-1749 (electronic)

2. Radar and radio navigation equipment, which includes:

3. Communication equipment, which includes:

4. Equipment for signaling and displaying information on the operation of aircraft

5. Equipment control and registration, which includes:

common technical policy should be developed by ministries and departments to

Chapter 7 provides examples of the implementation of airborne integrated avionics

1. Olyanyuk PV (2002) Vozdushnyj transport v sovremennom mire. – SPb: «Galeya Print»,

16. Solov’ev YUA (2000) Sistemy sputnikovoj navigacii. M.: Eko-Trendz

1 Place of Aviation Airborne Radio-Electronic Equipment

2.2.10 Remote Data Hubs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

3.3.5Advanced Flight Management Computer System

6 Joint Processing of Information in Integrated Airborne Radio

6.7.5Multichannel Nonlinear Estimation of Navigation

A3 Advanced avionics architecture

CSP Common signal processor

GNSS Global navigation satellite system

MCS Multilevel communication system

RNP Required navigation performance

1.1 Aviation Avionics as Part of Avionics Complexes

Natural Manufactured Sources of information Information consumers

Earth Objects of Information Interaction (OII) Relative RTC<OII

Special purpose Hierarchy level Structure Elemental base

Information exchange Radio technical complex Centralized Analog

Navigation support Complex radio technical system Decentralized Discrete

Information extraction Starry

Information interaction interruption Radio technical equipment

Fig. 1.1 Classification of radio systems

the hierarchy. The CRTS is understood to be a set of radiotechnical equipment of

• airborne autonomous RTS (DSDM, RA, WXR), CENS, etc.);

1.2 Airborne Avionics as Part of Aircraft Equipment

Table 1.1 (continued)

1.2.1 Features of Avionics of Modern Military Aircraft

The airborne computer AN/AYK-14 performs the following functions:

Table 1.3 (continued)

Management and indication

Front control panel Integrated Automatic

MIL-STD-1553 Multiplex data bus

Course and speed calculator Transponder Radiostation Datalink

INS Beacon Landing Landing and TACAN Beacon Intercom Communication

Control and display

Radar data processor Central computer

Inertial measurement Control panel IFFC

Arms control Integrated INS

Fig. 1.3 Structure of the avionics of the aircraft F-15E

IS VHF RS VHF RS Magnetic TACAN ILS Marker RA

Radar control APP APP

GINA system bus №1

GINA system bus №2

Non-instrumental Thermal MFD Helmet Video / Audio

Cabin bus (MIL-STD-1553B)

Cabin Communication Processor

Communication Radio Data IFF system

Flight control system Avionics bus (STANAG 3910)

Digital map Infrared Inertial Laser Mission data GPS Radar

Electronic self-defense IFF

Weapon control system

Fig. 1.5 Structure of the avionics of the aircraft Eurofighter

• At the first, lower, echelon of the hierarchy, information is processed by the