BACKGROUND
NAFC and its Members (Australian States and
Territories) have decided to adopt a national standard approach to the
provision of tracking and event logging services for aircraft involved in firefighting and related operations. It is planned
that this will extend to messaging systems in the future. The adoption of
a national approach follows extensive investigation and consultation with
agencies and operators throughout Australia.
A number of operational trials have also been undertaken.
The model adopted is a
"Integrator" model which will allow aircraft operators to continue to
select their own provider of tracking services and to select and install tracking
and event logging equipment appropriate to their aircraft and operation. The
aircraft operator's tracking provider must arrange to forward the tracking data
(to the required standard) to a central Integrator. In turn, the
Integrator stores and forwards the data to the various user agencies and
organisations.
This model is also designed to integrate
with and to complement systems that are already in place in some States and
Territories. It provides flexibility to participate at a number of different
levels, according to the particular needs of individual agencies.
TracPlus Global Ltd (www.tracplus.com)
is the currently appointed Integrator.
NAFC has entered into a Service Level Agreement (SLA) with TracPlus.
The SLA
ensures a guaranteed standard of service and also sets pricing.
Implementation is in three stages.
The first stage will concentrate on the national standard approach to aircraft
tracking. The second stage will cover event logging, while the third stage will
implement messaging.
Key features of the system include:
·
All aircraft engaged in fire
operations will ultimately be required to participate in the system, although
there will be a phase-in period. There will also be a requirement for some
vehicles provided by aircraft operators (eg fuel
tenders) to participate.
·
Aircraft operators will continue to make their own
arrangements for tracking services including selection of their preferred
tracking provider, but will also make arrangements directly with TracPlus to deliver the tracking data (and later, event
logging and messaging data) into the national “fire aircraft”
system. This may require the establishment of a “gateway” to the TracPlus integration system for a particular tracking provider.
·
Authorised fire agencies and
organisations wishing to view or use the data will also make arrangements
directly with TracPlus. There will be a number of
different ways of accessing the data, according to the needs of the user.
FAQs
Why
have tracking at all?
A.
Experience with existing tracking systems over nearly a decade in some States
has reinforced the value of real-time resource tracking. The technology is
currently used to:
·
support “manual” flight following (regular position reporting)
for search and rescue (SAR) and resource management purposes, reducing aircrew
and ground crew workload and reducing radio traffic;
·
support SAR missions by providing last known positions;
·
aid dispatching and resource allocation and to support resource
management;
·
improve situational awareness for aircrew, fire managers and supervisors;
·
aid verification of operating times and work performed to support
invoicing and accounting processes;
·
undertake basic mapping;
·
automatically provide other relevant data e.g. wind speed and direction, amount
of water delivered, type of suppressant;
·
automatically integrate aircraft or vehicle data with other electronic systems;
·
support effective monitoring of performance of assets e.g. amount of fire
control line built in a period of time; and
·
provide data for research and evaluation of fire control techniques.
In addition, the
communications layer that transfers data from aircraft often provides extra
functionality such as messaging and voice communications.
Aircraft operators have also rapidly been adopting tracking services for
their own fleet management and safety purposes.
Who pays?
A.
The general principle is that the aircraft operator pays to put the data into
the system, and the fire agencies and other data users will pay to get the data
out of the system.
The
amount that an operator would pay to put data into the system will depend on a
number of factors. If you already have suitable tracking equipment in an
aircraft and an arrangement with a suitable provider you will normally only pay
a small additional surcharge to feed the data in (plus an account establishment
fee).
Who makes the
arrangements?
A. The aircraft operator makes the arrangements to acquire and install
appropriate in-aircraft terminal equipment and makes the arrangements with a
tracking service. The aircraft operator’s tracking provider makes
an arrangement directly with TracPlus to pass the data into the national system via TracPlus.
Agencies
(and aircraft operators) who wish to view or use the data also make their own
arrangements directly with TracPlus. There is a range
of options depending on the degree of access required.
Even
though arrangements are made by aircraft operators and agencies directly with TracPlus, all arrangements are covered by an over-arching
agreement between NAFC and TracPlus that, amongst
many other things, sets out minimum service levels and defines standard pricing
for anybody participating in the national “fire aircraft” system.
Who
owns the data?
A. Whoever paid for it to be collected. Normally this will be the aircraft
operator, but as a condition of engagement on fire operations the aircraft
operator grants NAFC and other participating agencies a licence to use the
data.
Why
an “integration approach” … why not just appoint
one tracking provider?
A. For a
whole range of reasons, but mainly to give aircraft operators a much better
range of options for participation and hopefully to take advantage of systems
and equipment that is already in place.
Also,
the agencies viewing and using the data need to get it in a range of different
ways, as they all have different information systems. This is really the only
practical way of achieving that.
Note
that TracPlus does also offer a full tracking
solution as well as the integration service.
Why
not the same approach as Automated Flight Following (AFF) in the U.S.?
(where a data standard is specified, and the data is fed by
tracking providers directly into a “government” system.)
A.
In effect this is what we are actually doing. You could regard TracPlus as our outsourced provider of the Australian
equivalent of AFF. Taking this outsourced approach will however provide
greater flexibility, especially given the number of parties who will receive
and use the data in different ways. It will also ultimately provide
greater functionality for more advanced tracking and mapping features and for
when we get to event logging and two-way messaging. Additionally it
allows aircraft operators to take advantage, if they wish, of other value-added
services offered by TracPlus.
The Australian system has been designed, as far as practicable, to be
compatible with AFF. Aircraft
fitted with AFF equipment and complying with the AFF standard will mostly be
able to fit straight into the Australian system.
What
about event logging?
A. We
still need to do a little bit more work on that – including some
decisions about what event data can remain stored on board the aircraft and what
data needs to be transmitted in near-real-time alongside the tracking data and
into the integrated system. Some aspects are currently being
trialled. Realistically this stage will not be fully implemented until
2010-11. See also the answer under “What in-aircraft terminal
equipment should I choose?” below.
What
about messaging?
A. Again,
we still need to do a little bit more work on standards. Stay tuned
See also the answer under “What in-aircraft terminal equipment
should an aircraft operator choose?” below.
What
about voice?
A. Our
operational trials have confirmed that for a range of reasons it is best to
treat voice communications capability separately. This gives much greater
flexibility in selection and ongoing maintenance of aircraft equipment.
What
in-aircraft terminal equipment should an aircraft operator choose?
A. Essentially
it depends on what is the best fit for the aircraft and the business, provided
it is capable of providing the tracking data to the required standard. We
do recommend that terminal equipment be capable of accommodating future event
logging and messaging requirements. (Many terminals on the market have
the required interfaces). TracPlus can provide
advice on this.
Is
there a data specification?
A.
Soon. We are still working on it and will make it available as soon as
possible. At a minimum, if data conforms with the AFF specifications in
the United States
[see https://www.aff.gov/
] then there should be no problem.
More
information?
See
downloads, below, or ......
For general information and specifications contact NAFC at:
info@nafc.org.au
For other information regarding the system,
terminal equipment and for technical and sales queries contact Tracplus at:
SPECIFICATIONS
Under construction. Please check back
here soon.