1、1SISO DIS - Problem/Change Request FormBlock 1. Submitters may include a proposed title and suggested category. Leave the other Block 1 fields blank.PCR Title: Mode 5 PCR 101 Deficiency Corrections PCR No: 186A186BCategory: 2, 5 Cat Name: Integrity, Interactive Priority: unassigned Status: Open-FAPu
2、rpose: This form is to be used by a person submitting a problem, clarification or proposed change related to the IEEE 1278 series of DIS Standard or support documentation maintained for DIS. This form will be processed by the appropriate SISO DIS group and used to track discussions, analysis, recomm
3、endations, and proposed document changes. A copy of this form and instructions are located in the DIS PSG and DIS PDG Document Libraries. The minimum blocks to complete for a submission are Blocks 1, 2 and 3a. Not all sub-blocks may be applicable. See the PCR Form Submittal Instructions for more det
4、ails. Block 2. General InformationSubmitter: Frank Hill Date: 06/22/07 Phone: 404.446.3532Email: Phone 2 (DSN/Cell): Organization: SDS International Submitter Willing To Be Lead Analyst: YesPresent Lead Analyst: Frank Hill Email: Associated Analysts: Names: Email: Source: (Use ”X” for all that appl
5、y) Doc. Review: _ Experience: _ Test: X AAR: _ Event: _ Other: _ Type Request: (Use ”X” for all that apply) PDU: New _ Change _ | Clarification _X_ Question _ Support Doc. _ | Record: New _ Change _ | Other _ DIS IEEE 1278.1 PDU X 1278.2 Comm _ 1278.3 Siman/Feedback _ 1278.4 VV&A _ | DIS P&S _Docume
6、nt References: (if applicable or know. . Use block 7 continuation if needed.)Document Name Doc No. Page Paragraph DIS Standard 1278.1 Draft 13 - - - 7.6.5.4 and Annex E paragraphs.Additional Points of Contact:Name: Block 3. Technical Information a. Problem/Change Request Description: Boeing software
7、 engineers who are implementing Mode 5 IFF for their flight simulators using the draft Mode 5 requirements in IEEE 1278.1-200X have identified several deficiencies in the design of the Mode 5 interrogator requirements. Several changes need to be made to DIS Mode 5 interrogator requirements to solve
8、these deficiencies. These changes are straight-forward. Two existing Mode 5 transponder data records already included in the IFF PDU need to be specified for use by Mode 5 interrogators. This will require Mode 5 interrogators to implement Layer 3.Another issue raised by a Boeing engineer was that th
9、ey needed a way to distinguish between an interrogator and transponder when the system type was a combined interrogator/transponder. When this occurs, separate IFF PDUs are issued for the interrogator and transponder, but the system type will be the same.The two problems and proposed solutions were
10、posted to the SISO Mode 5/S Study Group Discussion Group. There was only one comment and that comment was resolved through discussions with the commenter and posted as a reply to his comment. The reply is also included in the analysis section of this PCR. Boeing software engineers also reviewed the
11、proposed solutions and thought they were viable.This PCR is referenced in Comment 2 (COM 2) in the SISO Comment Tracking System for IEEE 1278.1-200X with additional problems identified since that posting. b. Analysis of Problem/Change Request: An initial analysis may be included in an initial submit
12、tal, if desired. See Attachment 1 (Block 3 continuation) 2PCR Nbr: 186A Mode 5 - PCR 101Deficiency Corrections Page 2 c. Recommended Action If this includes changes to a document, list the wording changes in Block 8. A brief summary of the paragraphs changed and rationale may be provided here.Implem
13、ent the changes specified in Attachment 2.Block 4. Impact Analysisa. Present DIS Impact: (i.e. ,is it backward and forward compatible?)No impact (should be both forward and backward compatible) as it only applies to Layer 3 for a Mode 5 interrogator that is a new requirement. Layer 3 is not a requir
14、ement for any interrogator except for Mode 5 interrogators.b. HLA FOM Impact: (as a minimum, provide RPR FOM/GRIM impact. Other FOM s may also be included.)Appropriate changes will need to be made to the HLA RPR FOM and GRIM.c. Other Impacts: Include or state “None known”None known.Block 5. DIS Enum
15、eration ChangesIf there are enumeration associated with Block 8 text changes, or they are extensive, include the enumerations in the Attachment 1, Block 8 section (SISO-REF-010) Include the proper paragraph notations and format for that document. Otherwise state “None”. NoneBlock 6. PCR Action Histo
16、ryRecord actions taken and progress of discussions and review by listing meetings and dates that revisions are issued. Date Action22 Jun 07 PCR 186 posted in New PCR Announcement message by the PCR Manager.27 Aug 07 PCR 186 Revision A posted to the reflector and uploaded to the PCR file library.30 A
17、ug 07 PCR 186 Revision B posted to the reflector and uploaded to the PCR file library.continue on additional sheets as neededBlock 7. Continuation Submitter or DIS Lead analyst may add additional details for any block here, as well as, use attachments. Include block number and any sub-block titles.B
18、lock 8. Approved Changes to Documentation Draft _X_ Final _ Date: 22 Jun30 Aug 07Include the Document Number, specific document insertion points (usually paragraph numbers) and the exact wording of the changes.See Attachment 2.One bit indicatorForm Revised 29 December 2006PCR 186B Mode 5 Deficiency
19、Corrections3Attachment 1 Block 3b Analysis ContinuedIEEE 1278.1-200X Mode 5 Interrogator IssuesAuthor: Frank Hill 404.446.3532This information was posted in a document to the Mode 5/S Study Group for their review and comment.IntroductionBoeing software engineers are presently implementing Mode 5 fo
20、r their simulators. They have identified two issues with the present IEEE 1278.1(Draft 12) Mode 5 implementation. Mode 5/S was implemented as PCR 101 and originally included in Draft 10 of IEEE 1278.1-200X. (You can download a copy of the latest draft of IEEE 1278.1-200X as a DIS PDG member. If you
21、are not a member, you can become one by sending an email to the Acting DIS PDG Chair, Bob Murray, at: and request to become a member.)Problem 1. The present requirements for a Mode 5 transponder include the optional Mode 5 Pseudo Crypto Code capability. This is contained in the Crypto Control recor
22、d in Layer 3 for a Mode 5 transponder and is intended to support higher-fidelity interactions when in the Interactive mode. A Mode 5 Interrogator model also needs to be able to send its Mode 5 Pseudo Crypto Code, if it has that capability, in order to support interaction with Mode 5 transponders tha
23、t also have that capability and to support ELINT simulations that are monitoring emissions on interrogator-transponder frequencies. Problem 1 Solution.Provide the capability for a Mode 5 interrogator to also send the current Crypto Control record. The simplest and cleanest way to do this is to use t
24、he same Crypto Control record that is included in Layer 3 for a Mode 5 transponder. This means that Layer 3 must also be implemented for a Mode 5 Interrogator. A summary of the changes is as follows: Define a Layer 3 for a Mode 5 interrogator. The basic structure will be similar to the Layer 3 Mode
25、5 transponder format, but the Mode 5 Interrogator Basic Data fields will be different and largely unused. (Paragraph 6.3.8.5.4 a in the present draft standard has already been included for Layer 3 with the statement that it has not been implemented.) Specify that the present Crypto Control record sh
26、all be sent by a Mode 5 interrogator if it has implemented a Mode 5 Pseudo Crypto Code capability. Modify the Mode 5 interrogator Information Content, Issuance and Receipt rules to reflect the optional transmission, receipt and processing of the Crypto Control record.Problem 2. A Mode 5 transponder
27、in a high-fidelity aircraft cockpit simulator has an indicator that tells the pilot if the Mode 5 transponder did not respond to a lethal Mode 5 interrogation due to overload or other conditions. To support this requirement, the Mode 5 Interrogator IFF PDU must include information as to whether this
28、 Mode 5 interrogator has the capability to send a lethal interrogation when operating in the Regeneration Mode and whether it is actually sending a lethal interrogation when in the Interactive Mode. There are several lethal interrogation message formats that may be transmitted by an interrogator. Th
29、ere is presently a 32-bit Boolean field entitled Mode 5 Message Formats Present which indicates which of the 32 different message formats are capable of being sent by a Mode 5 transponder. This same field can be implemented as part of the Mode 5 Interrogator Basic data record that would be included
30、in Layer 3 for a Mode 5 interrogator. (It was an oversight that we didnt require Mode 5 interrogator to indicate the message formats they can request in the original PCR 101 change to the standard. This is required to support lethal interrogation modeling including ELINT platforms. Problem 2 Solutio
31、n.Require a Mode 5 interrogator to indicate all the message formats it can request in an interrogation, including any lethal interrogation message formats. (The details of a lethal interrogation are contained in the AIMS 03-1000 document which is an For Official Use Only document.) PCR 186B Mode 5 D
32、eficiency Corrections4 Define a Layer 3 for a Mode 5 interrogator. The basic structure will be similar to the Layer 3 Mode 5 transponder format, but the Mode 5 Interrogator Basic Data fields will be different and largely unused. (Paragraph 6.3.8.5.4 a in the present draft standard has already been i
33、ncluded for Layer 3 with the statement that it has not been implemented.) Structure Layer 3 similar to Layer 3 of the Mode 5 transponder except the Mode 5 interrogator Basic data record would have fewer field requirements. Specify that the Mode 5 Message Formats Present field shall be identical to t
34、he same field designated for a the Mode 5 transponder. Modify the Mode 5 interrogator Information Content, Issuance and Receipt rules to reflect the transmission, receipt and processing of Layer 3 data.It was shortsighted not to have required Layer 3 to be included for Mode 5 interrogators as there
35、are bound to be other overlooked requirements in the future that will require additional data fields. Layer 3 for Mode 5 was designed for that purpose. There are far fewer entities with Mode 5 interrogators than there are entities with Mode 5 transponders so this should not cause any significant net
36、work loading problem.Some Notes on Simulating Mode 5 Transponder Interactions with Mode 5 Interrogators.1. Normally, a Mode 5 or any other transponder for a constructive aircraft doesnt need to process a Mode 5 or other Interrogator IFF PDU at all as sim pilots of constructive aircraft do not need t
37、hat level of fidelity. However, if a constructive aircraft simulation is modeling an aircraft that has an interrogator, as well as, a transponder capability, as many modern fighters do, then they should be processing transponder IFF PDUs to support the aircrafts capability to determine whether a tar
38、get it sees on its airborne radar is friend or foe and for other tactical reasons that could help a constructive aircraft sim pilot play his or her role more realistically. 2. All IFF interrogators are required to support the Regeneration Mode. They may also support the Interactive Mode. The Interac
39、tive mode is where a transponder model and interrogator model are mimicking the transmission of an interrogation and the transponder is responding to that specific interrogation. Even so, if the interrogator and transponder models are not in the same room or building, the millisecond timing to mimic
40、 actual interrogations and responses are not able to be achieved due to distance constraints. This would cause a lot of IFF PDUs to be generated which is why the Regeneration Mode is used. An interrogator model that supports the Interactive Mode is usually one that is associated with a virtual fligh
41、t cockpit and used for in-house, closed loop training, or is associated with T&E or experimentations and not part of a large training exercise. 3. IFF Interrogators also normally operate in a Regeneration Mode and use the transponder IFF PDU information, together with Entity State PDU information, t
42、o decide whether they have received responses to their interrogations. It is up to the transponder or interrogator model to use the received IFF PDU information for transponders and interrogators operating in the Regeneration Mode to simulate IFF interactions. 4. For a virtual cockpit with a Mark XI
43、IA (Mode 5/S transponder), there are at least two indicator lights that will be present. One light to indicator when the transponder is getting interrogated by anyone regardless of whether the mode being interrogated is Mode 1, 2, 3/A, 4, C, 5 or S and another light to indicate if the transponder di
44、dnt reply to a Lethal Mode 5 interrogation. The “No Lethal Reply” situation would be due to the Mode 5 transponder being overwhelmed with interrogations it is trying to respond to which is not a likely occurrence. (The pilot may be notified of a “No Response To a Lethal Interrogation” by other means
45、 as well.)5. A virtual cockpit may be operating in a closed-loop, non-distributed simulation environment where the pilot training is closely controlled. In this case, it may be sufficient to randomly generate the interrogation light coming on and be able to adjust the random frequency at some instru
46、ctor control station. Interrogator IFF PDUs would not be involved. The Mode 5 “No Lethal Reply” condition could be triggered by a manual instructor operator action to simulate the overload or other technical condition causing no reply to a lethal Mode 5 interrogation. The alternative is to have a Mo
47、de 5 interrogator model that outputs an IFF PDU to provide an indication that it is sending a lethal interrogation. Even so, it would take several Mode 5 interrogator models all sending IFF PDUs with lethal interrogations simultaneously to cause the No Reply condition to be trigger at the virtual co
48、ckpit transponder. 6. It is still up to a high-fidelity Mode 5 transponder model to decide how it wants to simulate a Mode 5 “No Lethal Reply” condition, or even trigger the cockpit indicator light that it is being interrogated at all. It will usually have to rely on an internal data base of interro
49、gator characteristics plus process IFF and Entity State PDUs to come up with PCR 186B Mode 5 Deficiency Corrections5a reasonable approximation of the interrogation environment for a flight simulator when it is participating in a training or other event, especially if it occurs in a distributed simulation environment. The problems and proposed solutions were posted to the Mode 5/S Study Group Discussion group. th
