Design of A High Accurate Aircraft Ground-Based Landing System

International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology- Volume4Issue3- 2013
Design of a High Accurate Aircraft Ground-based Landing System

Ahmad Abbas Al-Ameen Salih1,a and Amzari Zhahir2,b
Department of Aerospace Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University Putra Malaysia level is below the allowable limit or when pilots cannot see Abstract The rapid increase in aviation industry requires parallel the runway. As it approach runway more accuracy is required effective plans, programs and designs of systems and since the limit for mismatching the touch point should not facilities nationwide to fulfill the increasing needs for safe air exceed meter level. Aircraft approach and landing are of the transportation. Aircraft landing remains a problem for a long most hazardous portions of flight. Accidents records indicate time all over the world. Systems that aircraft rely on in that approximately 50 percent of the accidents occur during landing are unreliable to perform a precise guidance due to aircraft landing (Lisrary & Afb, 2003). International Civil many limitations such as inaccuracy, unreliability and Aviation Organization (ICAO) has divided landing systems dependency. In low visibility conditions, when pilots are into three categories according to decision height, visibility unable to see the runway, the aircrafts are diverted to another and runway visual range. Category III C is not in operation airport. However, low visibility can also affect all airports in yet anywhere in the world because of systematic limitations the vicinity, forcing aircrafts to land in low visibility of landing systems in service. It requires landing with no conditions depending on Instrument Flight Rules (IFR). visibility or runway visual range. Currently, the limits of Aircraft approach and landing are the most hazardous integrity and accuracy of ground equipments have not been portions of flight; accidents records indicate that able to match ICAO standards and recommended practices. approximately 50 percent of the accidents occur during Nevertheless, they are still in use due to the lack of better aircraft landing. Aircraft landing Category III C is not yet in alternatives. The main current equipments limitations are: operation anywhere in the world. It requires landing with no inaccuracy, unreliability, vulnerability to multipath, visibility or runway visual range. obstruction in signal broadcasting, cause ground service Currently, Global Positioning System (GPS) is the cognition, lack of integrity and high cost. main navigation system used all over the world for aircraft In this paper, a ground-based positioning stations navigation, approach and landing. However, in aircraft based on concept of trilateration has been designed in order approach and landing phase, the accuracy of GPS is not to reduce or even to eliminate landing systems errors and to sufficient to perform a perfect landing due to the possibility achieve higher accuracy for landing of aircraft can meet CAT of aircraft to be drifted out of the runway. The accuracy of III C. system specifications have been calculated, designed GPS could be improved to 3 meter by sending correction. and simulated using Matlab. A simulated design has been Improved accuracy has not been able to meet ICAO performed using Matlab Simulink to simulate transmission standards for aircraft automatic landing. In this paper, aircraft and reception of data for accurate aircraft positioning and landing systems characteristics, performance and accuracies precise guidance to runway touch point. Positioning error have been studied and compared for the purpose of assessing sources have been considered and eliminated providing all limitations and drawbacks. An aircraft landing system with weathers high accurate aircraft landing system. improved performance is proposed to meet ICAO standards 1.2. Problem statement: for all-weather aircraft landing required and recommended The level of accuracy for aircraft positioning has practices with high accuracy to perform full automatic been achieved has not been able to match ICAO standard for landing for aircrafts. CAT III C and it is not sufficient to fulfill aircraft automatic Keywords: Landing System, Trilateration, Triangulation, Groundbased System, Accurate positioning, ILS, MLS, Positioning, GPS, landing. ICAO favored GPS over MLS, however, GPS is not and DGPS. highly accurate and has many limitations make such system not feasible to be used for aircraft automatic landing. GPS 1. INTRODUCTION: accuracy could be improved by receiving differential 1.1. Background: correction messages (DGPS) to 3-5 meters. Hence, this error The rapid increase in aviation industry needs parallel may lead to drift aircraft out of runway and crash. Beside the effective plans, programs and designs of landing systems and lack of high accuracy, the other GPS limitations are: Satellite facilities nationwide. Generally, in low visibility conditions, unavailability, Satellite Geometry, Low vertical accuracy, aircrafts are always diverted to another airport if the visibility
1,2
ISSN: 2231-5381
http://www.internationaljournalssrg.org
Page 415

Satellite signal broadcasting travel time is longer than signals transmitted from ground surface, GPS receiver update rate is low, Signal weakening and degradation, Ionospheric effects, GPS lack of high accuracy. In order to overcome GPS limitations, even though many systems have been designed to augment GPS and improve the accuracy, no system can be relied on to achieve a high accuracy in a range of less than 1 m for high speed applications with high integrity and reliability. Table (1) compares between aircraft landing systems accuracies.
Table 1: Aircraft landing systems accuracies:
Landing system DME with ILS DME/P GPS WAAS DGPS
Accuracy (feet) 1200 100 30 25 10
2. Literature review: Aircraft landing remains a problem for a long time all over the world. Systems that aircraft rely on in landing are unreliable to perform complete automatic landing due to many limitations. As flying aircraft approaches runway, more accuracy is required since the limit for mismatching the touch point on the runway should not exceed meter level. Commonly, aircrafts are diverted to alternate airport in low visibility conditions when the visibility is below the allowable limit. Until the mid-1950s, only visual landing procedures were possible. In 1958 the first Instrument Flight Rule (IFR) landing system developed. Currently, the standard radio landing guidance system used worldwide is the ILS ( Ackland et al., 2003) it was selected by (ICAO) in 1946 as the international all-weather aircraft landing aid [3]. In order to overcome the operational and technical problems of ILS, ICAO has formulated guidelines for futuristic system that will replace ILS. After evaluation the various systems, ICAO has accepted Microwave Landing System (MLS) for world-wide use [4]. Both ILS and MLS have many limitations and they are not highly accurate relatively (Table 2). They are unable to provide navigation service for aircraft flying in conditions of low visibility [5]. Hence, this is where a GPS-based landing system has the potential to complement landing systems, or even replacing them completely. Earlier, several papers described about GPS-based precision approach and landing [68]. The studies indicated that GPS was a revolution never dreamed possible that has many advantages over other navigation and landing systems. Since the introduction of GPS, most existing MLS systems have been turned off in North America. FAA favored GPS over MLS [9]. The major issues with GPS, guidance accuracy near the runway threshold and the
integrity of the system has not been able to match ICAO standards practices. GPS integrity and availability was enhanced by adding differential GPS (DGPS) to support new applications, such as aircraft precision approach and precise positioning. Therefore, the accuracy can be improved to about 3 m. (Brown et al., 1996) performed flight tests to examine DGPS as CAT III B. Results showed that accuracy could be achieved are in meter level. (J. H. Rye et al, 2004) used DGPS to increase the accuracy of GPS receiver for low speed movement. The results showed that positioning errors were considerably reduced. The maximum distance error was 0.546 m. As speed increases, accuracy decreases. To improve GPS accuracy, many augmentation systems have been used such as the Differential GPS, Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) and Local Area Augmentation System (LAAS). (Lawrence et al., 1996) designed integrated system of Wide Area DGPS with local Area Kinematic DGPS to improve accuracy. Results showed that messages were lost and real time correction messages were disappointing. [11] studied Real-time GPS navigation accuracy during approach and landing of ultra-light aircraft using simulated LAAS. The study indicated that accuracy is improved from 4.57m to 3.12m in dynamic tests. Stanford University has developed the Integrity Beacon as a means of augmenting GPS to provide the performance required to achieve the specifications of Category III. Results showed that, all the touchdown points are within this 95 percent touchdown box [12]. FAA has established an evaluation program to test the technical feasibility of using DGPS based technology for CAT IIIB precision approach and landing applications. Results indicated that, all of the touchdowns were accomplished with the outboard landing gear position less than 145 ft away from the runway centerline [13]. However, the error of 145 ft is not acceptable especially in low visibility conditions. In 2012, FAA has published Next Generation Implementation Plan (Next Generation GPS Operational Control Segment, 2012). FAA plan to use Ground Base Augmentation System (GBAS) for civil aviation local augmentation to support all flight phases including aircraft approach and landing. In 2011, a contract was awarded to produce Category II and III LAAS ground facility prototype. The plan expected capitalizing on satellite technology to implement landing procedures during periods of low visibility. By 2012, aircraft can land in low-visibility conditions. In 2012, at Bremen Airport, DFS Deutsche Flugsicherung was the first air navigation service provider in the world to operate GBAS for CAT I precision approaches for regular air services (Satellite-based landing system certified, 2012.). By the middle of this decade, certification for GBAS operations under all-weather operations CAT II and CAT III is expected.
ISSN: 2231-5381
Page 416

The use of GPS-based system for aircraft landing did not satisfy researchers and operators as well and the results have proved the lack of reliability and inaccuracy of the system (Mitelman, 2004; Lawrence et al., 1996; David et al., 1995; B. Pervan et al., 1997). Landing CAT III C is not in operation yet anywhere in the world due to unreliability, inaccuracy and dependence of used systems. Table 2 compares between aircraft landing systems accuracies. In this study, an autonomous aircraft landing system will be designed to overcome GPS limitations and provide a better alternative high accurate landing system.
Figure (1): Ground-based aircraft landing system transmitters
3. Aircraft Landing System: The civil aviation industry is developing rapidly to occupy the increasing needs for faster, comfortable and safe transportation. Aircraft landing is a critical phase and high accuracy in required especially when flying under low visibility conditions. The zero accident policy announced by FAA requires airliners to have essentially perfect navigation from take-off to landing (Aviation Safety Action Plan, 1995). ICAO has divided landing systems into three categories according to decision height, visibility and runway visual range [18]. Category IIIC operation requires precision instrument approach and landing with no decision height and no runway visual range limitations. 3.1. Aircraft Ground-based Landing System: A perfect navigation in landing phase needs a high accuracy to enhance safe aircraft landing in all-weather situations. Currently, no system has the capability to achieve aircraft landing CAT III C which enables the aircraft to land in allweather conditions and when the visibility level is low. In this paper, a high accurate ground-based aircraft landing system specifications will be designed to overcome previous aircraft landing systems limitations and to achieve high accurate guidance for aircrafts with improved capabilities and performance to meet ICAO CAT IIIC. 3.1. System components: 4 signal transmitter. Signal receiver on aircraft with 4 channels. 5 clocks; one in each transmitter (4 transmitters), and one in receiver. The figure below shows the system components and the distribution of transmitters towers around the runway.
3.2. System theory of operation: This system is based on a simple mathematical principle called Trilateration. Four base stations surveyed and located precisely beside the runway are used to broadcast radio signal to aircrafts receiver (figure 4.1). The system is totally autonomous. It broadcasts its own signals in specific frequencies via 4 channels. In aircraft landing positioning, 3 dimensions are required (longitude, latitude and altitude). The use of 3 transmitters provides a positioning with 2 dimensions (latitude and longitude) while 4 transmitters provide a full positioning with 3 dimensions since altitude is significantly needed for aircraft landing system with high accuracy. To locate itself, a receiver must find the distance to four transmitters of known position. If the receiver finds the distance from one transmitter, it knows that it must be somewhere on an imaginary sphere, with the transmitter as the center a radius of calculated distance between transmitter and receiver. If the receiver can generate spheres for two transmitters, it knows it can only be located in the surfaces intersection of the two spheres. The two spheres overlap in a ring of possible receiver positions. By generating a sphere for a third transmitter, the receiver narrows its possible position down to two points. When the coordination is performed using three transmitters, the receiver dismisses the point located in space leaving only one possible position assuming that the receiver is at mean sea level. By using the fourth transmitter, altitude can be determined where the fourth sphere intersects with in one of the two points. 3.3. Aircraft position calculation: A receiver on the aircraft receives the transmitted radio signals from ground stations transmitters and measures the time delay that the signal takes between transmission and reception. Both transmitters and receiver have a precise clock. The signal transmitted contains information about signal transmission time, so the receiver uses its clock to compare time of transmission in the transmitted code with time of reception to calculate time difference.
ISSN: 2231-5381
Page 417

Clocks are synchronized between receiver and transmitter. As receiver receives signal containing time code, it generates its time code internally and uses it to compare between two codes. The receiver determines the range between aircraft and each one of the four stations (figure 2). Range = (speed) . (time) (1) Where the speed of the signal is the speed of light which travels at 299 792 458 m / s and time is the time that the signal takes between transmitter and receiver. The receiver then calculates the coordinates (latitude, longitude and altitude) of the aircraft depending on the ranges to the four known reference stations by using positioning equations. Equation (2), (3), (4), and (5). others. This study aims to meet ICAO standard for CAT III C which gives aircraft the ability to land in low visibility conditions and even when the visibility does not exist at all and there is no runway visual range. Compared with the use of GPS for aircraft landing, Aircraft Ground-based Landing System provides solutions for many GPS error sources; the ionosphere and troposphere causes the largest error for GPS signal. Ionospheric and tropospheric errors considerably could be reduced because signal is transmitted from earth surface and does not travel through these layers. This will put troposphere and ionosphere out of the equation. In addition, this system gives the real and accurate altitude of the aircraft since it refers to the real height of the runway, not the mean sea level nor the earth ellipsoid like GPS. Moreover, the signal broadcasted from satellites takes about 0.07 second to reach to earth whereas it takes about 0.000004 second if the signal is transmitted from earth surface. Beside that, signal transmitted from Ground-based system will be stronger. It can penetrate construction in vicinity of airport. Additionally, satellites unavailability due to satellites distribution or construction blockage is a serious problem in critical stages of landing, this system is designed to be available continuously within the approach and landing area. Also, due to the distribution of satellites the vertical accuracy is always less than horizontal accuracy. More than that it causes an accuracy reduction when the visible satellites are all clustered together in a single quadrant, this narrows satellites visibility angle and consequently reduce the positioning accuracy. In this system, transmitters stations are distributed is precisely surveyed location with different towers height to give a wide visibility angle and provide accurate altitude (figure 1). Furthermore, this system is completely autonomous. It does not depend on GPS satellites such as DGPS where GPS errors are inherited and involved in calculation, nor any other system. Finally, no need for sending differential correction messages from DGPS stations. This will eliminate data link problems and errors. 3.7. System specifications calculation: Signal transmitted plays the major rule in the whole operation of accurate positioning of aircraft and enhances to improve the safety of landing automatically. A small signal problem could lead to disaster due to sensitivity of stage. 4.7.1. Covered area: Normally, in Instrument Landing System the Outer Marker (OM) beacon is located at 7.4 to 13 kilometers from the ILS threshold to mark the point at which glide slope altitude is verified or at which the aircraft descent (Terminal Area Separation Standards: Historical D evelopment, 1997). The first signal that aircraft receives from ILS is from outer marker when it is about 7-13 km from runway threshold.
Figure (2): Time difference calculation
3.4. Positioning equations: Equations of Pseudorange are used to calculate distance to each signal transmitter. The four ranges are used to calculate the accurate position of aircrafts. 1= (x1 X)2 +(y1 Y)2 +(z1 Z)2 2= (x2 - X)2 +(y2 - Y)2 +(z2 - Z)2 3= (x3 - X)2 +(y3 - Y)2 +(z3 - Z)2 4= (x4 - X)2 +(y4 - Y)2 +(z4 - Z)2 (2) (3) (4) (5)
Where X,Y,Z are the coordinates of ground station and xn,yn,zn are the coordinates of aircraft. 3.5. Receiver equations solutions: Aircraft receiver solves the 4 equations of ranges from 4 stations transmitters simultaneously to calculate the position of the aircraft accurately. Since the locations of the transmitting stations are known, they can be used as a reference points to calculate aircraft position. All ranges to stations are calculated from time difference of signal transmission and reception. These values are used by receiver in pseudorange equation to calculate the position. The four equations derived from the four stations are used to find out the values of (x,y,z) of the aircraft. 3.6. System advantages: This system is proposed to overcome the majority of aircraft landing systems limitations. It has many advantages over current systems. The main purpose of this study is to design a system to reduce some positioning errors and eliminate
ISSN: 2231-5381
Page 418

Aircraft Ground- based Landing System is designed to transmit signal in a range of 13 km from runway threshold for aircraft approaching and landing. 3.7.2. Earth curvature effect: Earth has a curvature at the approximate rate of 6 feet for every 9 miles [20]. In this study, the distance is considered small relatively since the system is used particularly for aircraft approach and landing so the effect of earth curvature is neglected. The curvature of the earth affects signal transmission only over a long distance (Figure 3). Frequency (VHF) band could be used to cover the required area for aircraft approaching and landing. The chosen frequency should be in a range where the signal propagation is not influenced by weather phenomena like, rain, snow or clouds. The characteristics of VHF propagation are ideal for short distance terrestrial transmission. VHF radio does not reflected by the ionosphere and thus transmissions are restricted to the local area. It does not interfere with transmissions thousands of kilometers away. Therefore, it is less affected by atmospheric noise and interference from electrical equipment than lower frequencies. Whilst it is easier than HF and lower frequencies to be blocked by land features, it is less affected by buildings and other less substantial objects than higher frequencies. Certain subparts of the VHF band have the same use around the world. Frequency range from 108 to 118 MHz is used for Air navigation beacons VOR and ILS [21]. In this system, data are broadcasted to receiver via four different channels in frequencies (110 MHz, 112 MHz, 114 MHz and 116 MHz). 3.7.5. Wavelength: =v/f (6) In this equation v is speed of light. For VHF range the wave length is between 1-10 meters. Wavelengths for system frequencies are listed in table (2).
Table (2): system channels frequencies wavelengths:
Figure (3): Earth curvature effects over long distance.
3.7.3. Distance between transmitters: A distance between transmitters is a very important factor must be taken into consideration in aircraft landing system design. The precisely calculated distribution of towers around the runway provides efficient operation with the best performance. Figure (4) indicates transmitters distribution around the runway. As transmitters are separated apart, the value of PDOP increases providing a better availability and more accurate positioning. Moreover, the vertical accuracy will be extremely improved. Overall, the possibility of signal to overlap will be less.
Frequency (MHz) 110 112 114 116
Wavelength (m) 2.727 2.679 2.632 2.586
3.7.6. Doppler shift: Doppler shift is the change in wave frequency and wavelength of observer due to relative movement between observer and wave source. Scientifically, when the relative speeds of source and receiver to a medium are lower than the wave velocity in the medium, received frequency
Figure (4): the distribution of transmitters around the runway
and
The distance for each of front transmitters from runway center line is 1 km and for the back transmitters it is 1.5km. Distance between front transmitters is 2 km and between back transmitters is 3 km. Distance to runway touch point for front transmitter is 1 km and for back transmitters is 3.354 km. 3.7.4. Frequency: The travelled signal range depends on frequency of the signal. This system is proposed to be used for aircraft landing where the area is considered small relatively, so a very High
emitter frequency could be calculated from the formula: Change in frequency: f = ( v / c) fo (7)
Where: c is the velocity of light, V r is receiver velocity and Vs is source velocity. The frequency change in approaching aircraft receiver due to the relative movement between transmitters and aircraft receiver could be determined as follows: For aircraft landing with speed of 100 km/h when source frequency is 110 MHz: Doppler shift = 36,666.67 HZ = 0.03667 MHz
ISSN: 2231-5381
Page 419

Frequency shift is proportional to aircraft speed and also to transmitter frequency. 3.7.7. Transmitter power: The general rule of transmitter power is it will take four times the power to double the transmission distance. Transmission range could be increased by increasing antenna height without increasing power. Raise the height significantly increase broadcast distance. Typically, transmission power is measured in dBm. The greater transmission power, the greater distances can be achieved. Friis transmission equation (equation 4.15) is used to calculate transmitted and received power ratio (Pr/Pt). Whereas, equation 10 is used to calculate the power received. Pr / Pt = Gt Gr ( /4 R)2 (8)
Figure (5): The height of front and back transmitters
where Gt and Gr are transmitter and receiver antennas gains respectively, Pt and Pr are transmitted and received power respectively, is the wavelength, and R is the distance. A typical VHF station operates at about 100,000 watts (80 dBm). Transmitter power = 100 KW (100,000 W). Transmitter power in dB = 10 log 100,000 = 50 dBW =80 dBm 3.7.8. Received power: Power received in dB: Pr=Pt(dB)+Gt(dB)+Gr(dB) - 20log(4 d/) (9) = - 43.5 dBW = 0.000,0447 W = -13 dBm 3.7.9. The height of the antennas: The height of the antenna is the most important factor to consider. It is used to calculate covered area. The area covered could be calculated from the formula: Distance (km) = 12.746 Am (10) Where Am is the height of the antenna in meter. For front transmitters, the coverage area is about 13 km. so, 13= 12.746 Am (11) Am= 13.259 m For the two back transmitters, the covered distance includes the length of the runway. For large aircrafts, the runway is designed with a length of 3 km. This means for two back transmitters the covered distance must be taller to cover approximately 16 km (Figure 5), hence: 16 = 12.746 Am (12) Am = 20.085 m Transmitter antenna radiates radio wave uniformly and continuously in all directions. Omni-directional antenna is used for transmission and reception of signal.
3.7.10. Antenna gain: it is a unitless measure that combines antennas efficiency (Eantenna) and directivity (D): G = Eantenna . D (13) In aviation VHF transmission, experiments and theoretical formula comparison showed that it is a good approximation for a general model to use the maximum gain of transmitter and receiver; respectively, they are -4 dB and 2.15 dB ( Roturier & Chateau, 1999; Maschinenbau, 2011). 3.7.11. Path loss: Free-space path loss is proportional to the distance squared between the transmitter and receiver, and also proportional to the radio signal frequency squared. The equation for FSPL is: FSPL = (4 = (4 d / )2 (14)
d f / c)2
Table (3) and Table (4) shows the FSPL for front and back transmitters.
Table (3): Free Space Path Loss (FSPL) when range is 13km for different frequencies:
Frequency (MHz) Wavelength (m) FSPL (dB) 110 2.727 95.55 112 2.679 95.7 114 2.632 95.86 116 2.586 96.01 Table (4.4) determines the level of FSPL when the covered range is 16 km.
Table (4): Free Space Path Loss (FSPL) when range is 16km for different frequencies:
Frequency (MHz) 110 112 114 116
Wavelength (m) 2.727 2.679 2.632 2.586
FSPL (dB) 97.35 97.51 97.66 97.81
In Figure (6), curves indicate the path loss in free space for 150 MHz and 200 MHz. it can be observed that, path is directly proportional to signal frequency and also to distance between transmitter and receiver.
ISSN: 2231-5381
Page 420

antennas to be directed to each other because it radiates radio waves equally and uniformly in all directions. 3.7.14. System coordination: To indicate an object position precisely, many systems have been developed for this purpose such as Decimal degrees. As with latitude and longitude, the values are bounded by 90 and 180 respectively. Typically, latitudes are mentioned before longitude. The other system used for coordination is UTM where coordinates are expressed as a distance in meters to the east and a distance in meters to the north. In UTM system coordinates are expressed in meters. In this system, an approaching aircraft positioning has been simulated using UTM system providing the transmitters heights and coordinates with respect to runway. Figure (8). Towers have been located around the runway according to calculations have been made determining transmitters height and locations.
Figure (6): the path loss in free space for 150 MHz and 200 MHz.
3.7.12. Aircraft approaching and landing: The distance from the runway where the aircraft starts to descend differs for airports. Therefore, the best glide speed and the glide ratio depend on the aircraft. Normal descents take place at a constant airspeed and constant angle of descent (3-4 degree final approach at most airports) [24]. In this system altitude determination is referenced to the height of the runway.
Figure (7): Aircraft altitude, distance to touch point and angle of decent
At a distance of 13km from runway touch point with a descend angle of 4: cos 4 = 13/h (15) h= 13.0178 Sin 3 = altitude/h (16) Altitude= 0.909 km = 909 m The determination of altitude according to the descend angle and distance to touch point are summarized in (Table 5):
Table (5): aircraft altitude for 4 degree descend angle:
Figure (8): transmitters coordinates around the runway
Distance to touch point (km) 13 8 5 3.354 3 1 0.1
Aircraft altitude (km) 0.909 0.559 0.350 0.235 0.210 0.070 0.007
As can be seen in the figure, transmitter coordinates are (0, 0, 20.085), (500, 3000, 13.2599), (2500, 3000, 13.259), (3000, 0, 20.085). The z values indicate the height of transmitter antenna. 3.7.15. Bad weather effect: Landing of aircrafts in a bad weather condition when there is no visibility requires a perfect positioning with high reliability and error possibility in a range not more than 1 m. currently, there is no landing system has this capability all over the world. Beside causing visibility reduction, bad weather affects the signals transmitted to aircraft which means signal delay needs significantly to be taken into account because an error in a signal of 1/100 second would
The angle between transmitter aircraft receiver: Calculation done showed that, for aircraft landing with a maximum angle of decent of 4, antennas angle are: = 3.93 for front transmitter and = 3.166 for back transmitters. However, the use of omni-directional antenna does not need
ISSN: 2231-5381
Page 421

lead to an error in the position determination of about 3,000 km. Generally, weather radar data is used as an indicator of troposphere delay differences between two locations. Radar data of reflectivity is a good source to determine the effects due to weather condition, rain rate and suspended water droplets. The impact of these delay differences was found to be less significant and has no effect over signal travel time. Studies showed that the effect of rain could be neglected in signal propagation especially in low frequency and over short ranges of transmission. Researches in GPS indicated that, rain, fog, snow, dust have no effect on GPS signal, and that is why GPS is considered as all-weather system. More accurate other GPS studies have shown that troposphere delay is increased due to the presence of severe weather fronts and heavy rain. (Gregorius & Blewitt, 1998) showed that troposphere zenith delay can increase up to 8 cm when a warm weather front approaches the receiver. Another study showed the significance of various tropospheric components on GPS signal accuracy is (Solheim et al., 1999). It has shown that water vapor, cloud liquid, rain and sandstorms can induce significant delays. According to the information provided in (Solheim et al., 1999), the delay induced due to water vapor is large compared to various other atmospheric components and can reach up to 140 mm/km for vapor diameter less than 10-7 mm. On the other hand, delays induced by clouds are less than 8 mm/km and drizzle and steady rain can induce surface delays of 0.2 mm/km and 2 mm/km, respectively, Also, it is reported in (Solheim et al., 1999) that water vapor has the largest contribution in the wet delay. The fog is considered as another form of rain. The importance of attenuation caused by fog is minor and could be neglected at frequencies lower than 2 GHz [27]. Scientists assume that, snow attenuation is less than rain attenuation falling at the same rate. Radio waves attenuation caused by hailstones is considerably less than that caused by rain. Figure indicates that in a heavy rain (200 mm/hour) the distance error is about 20 mm/km (Solheim et al., 1999). Another researches about VHF ground transmitters propagation effect in bad weather condition found that, signal is not affected by the presence of rain as it is similar to free space propagation. The analysis of the radar backscatter measured signal delay in different rainfall rates does not show organized and salient time delays ( Roturier & Chateau, 1999). 3.7.16. System multipath: Previously, many researches have been done intending to mitigate the effect of signal multipath. In GPS positioning, it is one of the major sources of position error. However, many techniques have been produced to reduce and even eliminate the phenomenon. There are a wide variety of mitigation techniques which employ schemes of data processing. Progress in Electromagnetics research measurements provide an efficient reduction of the multipath to centimeter level and are widely used. Other typical methods are focusing on taking advantage of SNR measurements, repeatability of multipath at ground reference stations. Multiple receivers can be used to cancel spatial correlated multipath. The results due to adaptive filtering methods are encouraging and significant reduction of error to centimeter level is observed. A choke ring antenna is originally designed to mitigate multipath. Many studies compared between different types of antennas, results showed that the choke ring antenna has the best performance in mitigating multipath. A more specialized study about the use of VHF for aircraft transmission has been conducted dedicating to introduce a general model for fading on the aeronautical VHF multipath channel ( Roturier & Chateau, 1999). The model designed is based on previous theoretical and experimental multipath studies developed in the context of VHF Digital Link (VDL) system validation. Practically, determining receiver and transmitter antennas radiation prosperity is the main challenge, however, experiments and theoretical formula comparison presented in ( Roturier & Chateau, 1999) showed that it is a good approximation for a general model to use the axisymmetric radiation diagram functions of a vertical half-wavelength dipole and maximum gain Gmax of transmitter and receiver such as defined in [23], respectively, they are: 20 log 10 (max ground) = -4 dBi (18) 20 log 10 (max ground) = 2.15 dBi (19) 4. Aircraft Ground-based Landing System simulation: In previous section, Aircraft Ground-based Landing System characteristics and specifications have been calculated to enable the system to precisely locate the aircraft position and enhance it to approach and land safely. In this section, system specifications will be simulated to test the system performance and evaluate the positioning accuracy. This
Figure (9): The effect of rain in signal delay over distance
ISSN: 2231-5381
Page 422

system will be simulated using Matlab Simulink. It provides built-in support for prototyping, testing, and running models 4.1. Simulation design: The operation of broadcasting data from transmitters to receiver takes place in sequent steps start by generating of signals and codes (0s and 1s) to be decoded. Each one of the four transmitters has its unique code which is used by receiver to identify transmitters individually. After that signal is modulated and broadcasted through channel. All signals are received by one receiver in aircraft. Signal are demodulated, decoded and then displayed. Code received is used to determine transmitters locations and distance to each one of them. Figure (10) shows the process of data transmission and reception. on low-cost target hardware. It provides the possibility of comparing theoretical results with experimental results.
Figure (10): Aircraft Landing Ground-based System simulation blocks
4.2. One transmitter simulation: Data transmission takes place from each transmitter to receiver individually. One Transmitter/Receiver circuit (Figure 11) is used to examine time delay, transmitter/receiver error correlation and multipath effects.
Figure (11): Data transmission from one transmitter to receiver
ISSN: 2231-5381
Page 423

equations and locate aircraft. A very small clock drift leads to remarkable position error. Matlab time scope block shows time difference precisely. 4.4. Attenuation and Multipath: Rayleigh and Rician fading channels are useful models of real-world phenomena in wireless transmission. These phenomena include multipath scattering effects, time dispersion, and Doppler shifts that arise from relative motion between the transmitter and receiver (Loo & Secord, 1991). The Communications System Toolbox provides a plotting function that helps to visualize the characteristics of a fading channel. For direct line-of-sight path from transmitter to receiver Rician Fading Channel is used while for one or more reflected paths from transmitter to receiver Multipath Rayleigh Fading Channel is used.
4.3. Time delay: The broadcasted signal contains a code generated by transmitters. Broadcasted signal includes: The time of message transmission and transmitter position when message is transmitted. Receiver receives the signal and generates internal code which is compared with transmitted code to determine lag time to each transmitter since each one has its unique code. Figure (11) shows transmission operation simulation. (Figures 12.a and 12.b) show the signal pulse generated in transmitter and receiver.
Figure (12.a): Transmitted signal pulse Figure (14): Rayleigh fading channel multipath
Figure (15) shows Rician fading channel multipath. Relative motion between the transmitter and receiver causes Doppler shifts in the signal frequency (Figure 16).
Figure (12.b): Received signal pulse
Time difference between transmitter and receiver specifies the distance that the signal takes to reach to receiver (Figure 13). Time differences provide a solution for positioning equations to locate the aircraft.
Figure (15): Rician fading channel multipath
Figure (13): Time difference between transmission and reception
Determination of distance between transmitter and receiver is carried out using the received code since receiver and transmitters clocks are precisely synchronized. Distance is continuously computed by receiver to solve trilateration
Figure (16): Doppler spectrum
ISSN: 2231-5381
Page 424

The Doppler spectrum is a statistical characterization of the fading process. The channel visualization tool makes periodic measurements of the Doppler spectrum (blue dots). The Multipath Rician Fading Channel block implements a baseband simulation of a multipath Rician fading propagation channel (figure 15). This block is used to model wireless transmission systems when the signal travels along a line-of-sight or direct path (Tsai, 1994). Multipath simulation results showed that the analytical results match with GPS and VHF transmission systems results such as in (Hannah, 2001; Roturier & Chateau, 1999; Hoeher, Haas, & Kiel, 1999; Hajj & Young, 2002; Rost & Wanninger, 2012). Multipath is directly varies from one transmission environment to another. The number of signal reflected is different changes as the aircraft moves. The corresponding numerical results have been presented has shown that the analytical and simulation results match quite well for both static and dynamic environments. Since these analytical results are optimal among standard transmission systems, they can be applied to analyze the performance real aircraft landing system despite of that multipath effects depend on transmission environment and number of reflected paths and this could be different from one airport to another. Nevertheless, it is easily can be modeled and mitigated. 4.5. Transmitters positioning system simulation: As in GPS, in order to determine the aircraft coordinates, at least, a signal from different four transmitters is required. In this system simulation, trilateration positioning equations have been solved using Matlab. Four transmitters coordinates and distance to each one of them are required to determine receiver location coordinates. Matlab simulation showed that distance from three transmitters assumes altitude is on earth surface so a signal from four transmitters at least is required. Figure (17) shows two possibilities of altitude for ranges from 3 transmitters. transmitters equally. Initially, to simplify the explanation of accurate positioning process, an imaginary system has been established. Matlab code (figure 18) has been used to determine aircraft coordinates (x,y,z).
Figure (18): Matlab aircraft positioning code
4.7. High accurate Ground-based Aircraft Landing System position calculation error: Figure (19) indicates the positions on transmitters towers.
Figure (19): transmitters towers positions
Figure (17) : three transmitters, two possible altitudes.
4.6. Aircraft accurate positioning simulation: Since transmitters are in the same area and they are close to each other relatively, environmental conditions affect
Simulation results showed that, when system has an error of 20 mm/km from transmitters, the system is feasible; the maximum position error is 4 m. When simulating a landing system using the same characteristics with error of 1mm/km, the position errors determined in three dimensions does not exceed 0.2062 m. Aircraft position has been calculated and simulated taking into account the position error. Positing errors are the differences between route coordinates and aircraft position. The route points coordinates have been calculated according to distance to aircraft runway touch point and altitude when the aircraft descending with an angle of 4 degrees. Figure (20) shows the aircraft approaching and landing to runway touch point. The aircraft appears as a red dot rounded by a circle. The dot in the center indicates the route data point or the accurate aircraft position as there is no position error. The circle rounded the dot indicates the positioning error since aircraft could be at any point in the circumference. The position error identifies the circle radius.
ISSN: 2231-5381
Page 425

the distance between the transmitter and a receiver decreases. As aircraft approaches, the signal multipath effect increases. The technology of Trimbles Everest multipath rejection provided a high-accuracy solution for positioning applications. Everest GPS Pathfinder provides up to 50% higher accuracy than previous systems since multipath signals are rejected. Another test results from RT2 real-time positioning system developed by NovAtel indicated the level of multipath effect is considerably reduced. Dynamically, the error is 13.3 cm horizontally and 15 cm vertically. Table (5.8) simulates approaching aircraft positioning with an effect of multipath of 13.3 cm horizontally and 15 cm vertically. The reflection of signal depends on the environment of signal transmission and reception which is totally different from one place to another, as a consequence, a multipath effect is continuously changing as aircraft approaches. Signal multipath mitigation depends on antenna and receiver design. In this system, a receiver is expected to have a high performance and ability to mitigate multipath to low limits. A receiver noise is another source of error that causes an accuracy reduction. However, modern and advanced techniques using integrated hardware and improved algorithms reduces this factor to low levels and even it could be neglected. [34] conducted a research to assess GPS receiver noise effect. The precision achieved is at the millimeter level. Studies showed that even for high accurate positioning, receiver noise can be neglected.
Figure (20): Aircraft route position and error limits
Generally, the main positioning error factors are: ionospheric and tropospheric delays, signal multipath, receiver clock drift and receiver noise. In order to achieve an accurate aircraft positioning, accuracy reduction factors must be eliminated. In this system, weather conditions have no effect due to the use of VHF band and also because signal traveled distance is short relatively. The uses of modern techniques reduce multipath effect to minimum. Researches indicated multipath positioning accuracy reduction is in centimeter level. Receiver clock drift is corrected by receiving signal from many separated transmitters clocks. Receiver noise and receiver malfunctions errors have been reduced using a good performance and high reliability. The number and the strength of reflected signals depend on transmission environment. Signal reflections increase as Distance to touch Route coordinates point (km) (x,y,z) 13 (1500, 16000, 909) 8 (1500, 11000, 559) 5 (1500, 8000, 350) 3.354 (1500, 6354, 235) 3 (1500, 6000, 210) 1 (1500, 4000, 70) Figure (21) shows the relationship between positioning accuracy and distance to runway touch point. As the aircraft approaches, the effect of multipath increases and consequently the accuracy is decreased.
Table (7): Aircraft positioning with multipath effect of 13.3 cm horizontally and 15 cm vertically
Aircraft position (x,y,z) (1500.001, 16000.002, 909.02) (1500.02, 11000.05, 559.08) (1500.04, 8000.07, 350.11) (1500.05, 6354.09, 235.126) (1500.06, 6000.1, 210.13) (1500.087, 4000.1, 70.15)
Position error (m) 0.020 0.096 0.136 0.163 0.175 0.200
Figure (21): Positioning accuracy as aircraft approaches
ISSN: 2231-5381
Page 426

4.8. Ground-based Aircraft Landing System Indicator simulation: ILS indicator simulator has been designed using VisualBasic.net to simulate data reception and displaying. As the receiver receives the signal from ground-based transmitters, it determines its current location which is updated continuously. Since the main purpose of this system is enhancing the aircraft to land with a high accuracy positioning, aircraft drift from route is indicated precisely. Vertical and horizontal deviations have been displayed in ILS-style display which has been attached for an easier indication of the aircraft position with respect to route data. The vertical deviation has been determined based on the difference in altitude between determined position and route data. The horizontal deviation has been calculated using azimuth between two points. Route data are recorded in simulator. As a particular route is chosen, all data regarding destination will be presented including distance and time to destination and route drift data as well. System compares between positioning data and route data to determine position deviation. As system detect any drift, landing indicator display the amount of deviation. The deviation could be either in horizontal or vertical coordination or in both of them. The system may be connected to auto-pilot to follow the route data precisely and land the aircraft automatically. The system determines the true altitude of the aircraft above the runway unlike GPS altitude determination which is based on altitude above mean sea level not above runway. The simulator indicates current altitude, route altitude and difference between them. As the aircraft fly above route recommended altitude, the indicator will be under the center and pilot must decent until indicator point to center, and vice versa. 4.8.1. ILS indicator: Tepically, in ILS, two independent indicators are used to guide the aircraft laterally and vertically. In order to correct position error, the pilot needs to center the two indicators; left and right for lateral indicator, up and down for vertical indicator. Figure (22). (a)
Figure (5.23): ILS indicator
Figure (23) explains the changes of ILS indicator as the aircraft approaches. In point A, aircraft is in left of runway centerline. Pilot must turn right. In the same point, the aircraft is lower than recommended landing path. Pilot must go up. In point B, aircraft is heading into correct coordinates. The indicator shows the improvement of lateral and vertical indication. As the aircraft reaches point C, where it is the correct coordinates, indicator deviation vanished.
Figure (23): ILS indicator deviation
Touch point coordinates (x,y) are (1500, 3000) in UTM system. When it is converted to decimal degrees, it is equivalent to (-175.475306, 0.0270586283). The simulation showed that the azimuth between the two points (1500, 3000) and aircraft coordinates (1500, 16000) is 360. The aircraft is in a straight light with runway centerline. When comparing the two points: runway touch point is (1500, 3000) and aircraft position is in point (1600, 16000), the azimuth reading between the two points is 0.431. The runway center line in on the right to pilot; pilot must turn right. Figure (23.a). When comparing the two points: runway touch point coordinates: (1500, 3000) and aircraft position (1400, 16000), the azimuth reading is 359.55. The runway center line in on the left to pilot; pilot must turn left. Figure (23.b).
(b)
Figure (24) shows the aircraft landing system display.
Figure (22): ILS indicator
ISSN: 2231-5381
Page 427
Figure (24): Aircraft landing system indicators
5. Conclusion: Aircraft landing is a very critical stage. The risk for aircraft to be drifted out of the runway or crash building or other aircraft is high so a superior accuracy is required to guide aircraft to runway touchdown point precisely. In bad weather conditions when visibility is low or runway visual range does not exist, aircraft rely on full automatic system to land systematically. Currently, no system is able to provide this reliability all over the world. In this study a new landing system has been proposed to reduce and eliminate many aircraft landing systems limitations. System characteristics and specifications have been calculated to enhance aircraft to land in all weathers safely with high accuracy guidance. Aircraft landing ground-based system provides solutions for many landing systems problems and reduces some of the positioning errors sources and eliminate others; inonsphere and troposphere effects are out of positioning equation. Signal travel time has been shortened from 0.07 second to about 0.000004 second. The aircraft altitude determination has become more reliable since it refers to the real height of the runway, not the mean sea level nor the earth ellipsoid like GPS. Beside that, signal transmitted from Ground-based system is stronger. It can penetrate construction in vicinity of airport. Satellites unavailability due to satellites distribution or construction blockage is a serious problem especially within the approach and landing area. The problem has been dealt with by accurate and calculated transmitters distribution around the runway with different towers height to give a wide visibility angle and provide accurate altitude calculation. Therefore, vertical accuracy became as accurate as horizontal accuracy. The receiver clock drift error can be corrected by receiving signal from many transmitters since a separated clock for each transmitter is used. Overall, this system is completely autonomous. It does not depend on GPS
satellites such as DGPS where GPS errors are inherited and involved in calculation, nor any other system. In this system, the only sources of positioning error are signal multipath and receiver noise. However, studies showed that Multipath could be mitigated to centimeter level using new techniques and antennas. In addition, modern and advanced techniques use integrated hardware and improved algorithms can reduce receiver noise to low levels. Studies indicated it could be neglected even for high accuracy positioning since its effect is in millimeter. The calculated system specifications have been simulated to evaluate the performance and test the capability of the system to achieve aircraft accurate positioning. Trilateration positioning equations have been solved using Matlab. A code was established to indicate the aircraft position coordinates. Aircraft approaching and landing have been simulated with different positioning error sources. However, the real system specifications results a position error of 0.2 m as multipath is in the highest level. Simulations have been done showed that, the accuracy of the system is in centimeter level. The aircraft positioning simulations have been performed comparing the system accuracy with current aircraft landing systems. Results achieved showed that, this system is far outperforming other systems. This system is 50 times more accurate than GPS and 15 times more accurate than DGPS. Some of GPS and DGPS accuracy reduction factors have been eliminated and others have been reduced resulting a high accurate all-weather system capable to achieve ICAO recommended standards for CAT III C to enhance aircrafts to land blindly. For an easy access and simple indication of aircraft approaching the runway, ILS style indicator has been attached to indicate the aircraft position with respect to runway and runway touch point. The indicator has been
ISSN: 2231-5381
Page 428

simulated using VisualBasic.net. It provides an accurate aircraft deviation from recommended route points coordinates enhancing the aircraft to land in all weather conditions. Furthermore, this system can be used to guide aircrafts to the parking lots in the airport. Finally, the positioning results of simulation showed the performance of the system. Compared with GPS, the majority of error sources have been eliminated. Calculations and simulation have been done showed that visibility, integrity, availability and accuracy have been considerably increased. Acknowledgement: We would like to express our gratitude to Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) for granting the Research University Grant Scheme (RUGS) with Project No. 05-05-11-1560RU, in which this research work is made possible. 6.
[1] [2] [3] [4] system architecture, in PROCEEDINGS OF ION GPS, 1997, vol. 10, pp. 16131622. Next Generation GPS Operational Control Segment (OCX) Contract Awarded, p. 20230, 2010. Satellite-based landing system certified (10. . A. Dissertation, SIGNAL QUALITY MONITORING FOR GPS AUGMENTATION SYSTEMS c Copyright by Alexander Michael Mitelman 2005 All Rights Reserved, no. December, 2004. D. Lawrence, J. Evans, Y. Chalo, Y. Tsai, C. Cohen, T. Walter, P. Enge, I. D. Powell, and B. Parkinson, Int egration of Wide Areia DGPS with Local Area Kinematic DGPS, 1996. E. Meeting, R. Visual, and R. Speci, AERODROME METEOROLOGICAL OBSERVATION AND FORECAST STUDY GROUP ( AMOFSG ), no. 35, pp. 68, 2010. Terminal Area Separation Standards: Historical Development , Current Standards , 1997. K. Bullington, Radio propagation for vehicular communications, IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology , vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 295308, Nov. 1977. Integration of Commercial Space Vehicle Traffic into the National Airspace System, 2012. A. Mobile, C. Panel, W. Group, A. D. Prepared, B. Chateau, and A. Item, A GENERAL MODEL FOR VHF AERONAUTICAL MULTIPATH PROPAGATION CHANNEL, no. January, pp. 1 24, 1999. V. F. Maschinenbau and D. C. Vernaleken, Autonomous and AirGround Cooperative Onboard Systems for Surface Movement Incident Prevention. 2011. P. Boskoski, B. Mileva, and S. Deskoski, Auto landing using fuzzy logic, pp. 28, 2005. T. Gregorius and G. Blewitt, The Effect of We ather Fronts on GPS Measurements Ad Goes Here Keyline does not print Ad Goes Here Keyline does not print. F. S. Solheim, J. Vivekanandan, R. H. Ware, and C. Rocken, Propagation delays induced in GPS signals by dry air, water vapor, hydrometeors, and other particulates, Journal of Geophysical Research , vol. 104, no. D8, p. 9663, Apr. 1999. R. Itu-r, RECOMMENDATION ITU-R P.838-3 Specific attenuation model for rain for use in prediction methods, pp. 18, 2005. C. Loo and N. Secord, Computer models for fading channels with applications to digital transmission, IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 700707, 1991. Y. Tsai, The feasibility of combating multipath interference by chirp spread spectrum techniques over Rayleigh and Rician fading channels, Proceedings of IEEE 3rd International Symposium on Spread Spectrum Techniques and Applications (ISSSTA94) , pp. 282286, 1994. B. M. Hannah, Modelling and Simulation of GPS Multipath Propagation GPS Multipath Propagation. P. Hoeher, E. Haas, and D.- Kiel, Aeronautical Channel Modeling a t VHF-Band, pp. 19611966, 1999. G. A. Hajj and L. E. Young, Assessment of GPS Signal Multipath Interference, 2002. C. Rost and L. Wanninger, Modelling and Correction of Carrier Phase Multipath Effects, no. July, 2012. a. R. Amiri-Simkooei and C. C. J. M. Tiberius, Assessing receiver noise using GPS short baseline time series, GPS Solutions, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 2135, Apr. 2006.
[14] [15] [16]
[17]
[18]
[19] [20]
[21]
References:
A. T. Lisrary and K. Afb, Controls , Displays , and Information Transfer Controls , and Information Transfer for, 1983. LANDING, pp. 311, 2003. M. Kayton, Navigation: Land, Sea, Air & Space . IEEE press, 1990. L. Chittaro and S. Burigat, 3D location-pointing as a navigation aid in Virtual Environments, in Proceedings of the working conference on Advanced visual interfaces , 2004, pp. 267274. U. Kingdom, ROBUST NAVIGATION ALGORITHMS FOR AIRCRAFT PRECISION APPROACH , LANDING AND SURFACE MOVEMENT USING GLOBAL, no. September, 2008. P. Enge, Local area augmentation of GPS for the precision approach of aircraft, Proceedings of the IEEE , vol. 87, no. 1, pp. 111132, 1999. J. Meyer-Hilberg and T. Jacob, High accuracy navigation and landing system using GPS/IMU system integration, Proceedings of 1994 IEEE Position, Location and Navigation Symposium PLANS94, pp. 298305, 1994. S. Snyder, B. Schipper, L. Vallot, N. Parker, and C. Spitzer, Differential GPS/inertial navigation approach/landing flight test results, Aerospace and Electronic Systems Magazine, IEEE , vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 311, 1992. J. Duke and V. Torres, Multifactor productivity change in the air transportation industry, no. March, pp. 3245, 2005. R. Brown, G. Romrell, G. Johnson, D. Kaufmann, and X. Qin, DGPS category IIIb automatic landing system flight test results, in Position Location and Navigation Symposium, 1996., IEEE 1996, 1996, pp. 664671. S. Huang and M. Lee, THE STUDY OF REAL -TIMED GPS NAVIGATION ACCURACY DURING, 2000. J. David, W. Parkinson, J. Aubrey, U. Airlines, S. Francisco, A. Group, N. Kaufmann, B. Commercial, B. David, M. View, A. City, and J. Swider, Autolanding a 737 U sing GPS Integrity Beacons, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 467486, 1995. B. Pervan, D. Lawrence, K. Gromov, G. Opshaug, J. Christie, P. Y. Ko, A. Mitelman, S. Pullen, P. K. Enge, and B. W. Parkinson, Flight test evaluation of a prototype local area augmentati on [22]
[23]
[24] [25]
[5]
[26]
[6]
[7]
[27]
[28]
[8]
[29]
[9] [10]
[30] [31] [32] [33] [34]
[11] [12]
[13]
ISSN: 2231-5381
Page 429

Design of A High Accurate Aircraft Ground-Based Landing System

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Design of A High Accurate Aircraft Ground-Based Landing System

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology- Volume4Issue3- 2013