See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/273302393

AeroMACS Evolution - Analysis During Landing, Takeoff, and Approach Phases

Article  in  IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems · July 2014

DOI: 10.1109/TAES.2014.130049

CITATIONS READS
6 82

5 authors, including:

Simon Plass Luca Sanguinetti

German Aerospace Center (DLR) Università di Pisa
110 PUBLICATIONS   659 CITATIONS    180 PUBLICATIONS   3,409 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Multicasting in Massive MIMO View project

Power control and resource management in networks View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Luca Sanguinetti on 29 April 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.


AeroMACS Evolution — Synchronization and
Performance Analysis during Landing, Take-Off,
and Approach Phases
Paola Pulini, Member, IEEE, Simon Plass, Member, IEEE, Lorenzo Taponecco Member, IEEE, Michele Morelli,
Senior Member, IEEE, and Luca Sanguinetti, Member, IEEE
Abstract—The Aeronautical Mobile Airport Communications
System (AeroMACS) has been developed for future high-rate,
secure, and safety enhancing airport communications in the
C-band. Although initially designed for ground applications,
the relatively large radio coverage area of AeroMACS suggests
its potential extension to new operative scenarios wherein a
data link is established between the control tower and the
aircraft even when the latter is not in contact with the airport
surface. An examination is needed for these new applications
concerning channel properties, synchronization aspects, and
general performance behaviors. In this paper, the possibility
of using AeroMACS during the approach, landing and take-
off phases of an aircraft flight is investigated. After deriving
the channel parameters for the new application scenarios, the
synchronization and channel estimation algorithms are presented
and the overall error rate performance is assessed by means of
computer simulations. Our results indicate that AeroMACS is
able to cope with the new operational phases and its use can be
extended beyond airport surface applications.
Index Terms—AeroMACS, synchronization, channel estima-
tion, coverage, landing, take-off, channel modeling, performance
analysis.
I. I NTRODUCTION
T HE increasing demand for high speed communications on
the airport surface by air traffic controllers, pilots, airlines
and airport operators calls for the deployment of an advanced
aeronautical communication system that can cover all future
needs of air traffic control and management (ATC, ATM). The
common opinion within the aeronautical community is that
improvements of the current VHF communications concept
will not be able to provide the required performance and
safety levels for the traffic volumes expected beyond 2015
and, accordingly, a significant step forward is required. A
promising candidate to cope with future ATM requirements
is the Aeronautical Mobile Airport Communications System
(AeroMACS) [1], which is currently under validation by the
European research project SANDRA (Seamless Aeronautical
The research leading to these results has been partially funded by the
European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013)
under Grant Agreement n◦ 233679.
This paper was presented in part at the Integrated Communications,
Navigation and Surveillance Conference (ICNS), Herndon, VA on April 2013.
Paola Pulini and Simon Plass are with the Institute of Communications
and Navigation, German Aerospace Center (DLR), Oberpfaffenhofen, 82234
Wessling, Germany. Email:{Paola.Pulini, Simon.Plass}@dlr.de.
Lorenzo Taponecco, Michele Morelli and Luca Sanguinetti are with the
Dipartimento di Ingegneria dell’Informazione, University of Pisa, Italy. Email:
{lorenzo.taponecco,michele.morelli,luca.sanguinetti}@iet.unipi.it.
1
Networking through integration of Data links Radios and
Antennas) [2]. AeroMACS offers high-rate, secure, flexible,
and safety enhancing communications, and it is expected to
constitute a pillar of the shared vision of Next Generation Air
Transportation System in the U.S. [3] and the Single Euro-
pean Sky ATM Research (SESAR) program [4] in Europe.
Furthermore, AeroMACS will directly contribute to key goals
of ACARE’s Strategic Research and Innovation Agenda [5].
AeroMACS is based on the IEEE 802.16 standard for wire-
less metropolitan area networks [6], which uses orthogonal
frequency-division multiplexing (OFDM) as an air interface.
The adoption of a multi-carrier technology provides the system
with high spectral efficiency, increased robustness against
multipath distortions and a remarkable flexibility in assigning
system resources. It was recently shown that further physical
layer (PHY) advancements can be achieved by introducing
packet level coding [7], multiple antenna techniques [8], differ-
ent cooperative communication schemes [9], [10], and efficient
subcarrier allocation methods [11]. The basic functionality of
AeroMACS is the support of surface airport communications
with vehicle speeds up to 92 km/h (50 knots). This means that
the parking, apron and taxiing phases of the aircraft represent
the conventional application scenarios of the novel communi-
cation system. In 2012, AeroMACS tests were already done
at Cleveland Hopkins airport including a Boeing 737-700
aircraft during taxiing and high speed, but without lift of the
ground [12]. Further tests are planned to be performed in June
2013 in the context of the SANDRA project during the take-off
and landing of an Airbus 320. The first two airports that will
be deployed with an AeroMACS system are Oberpfaffenhofen
in Germany, and Toulouse-Blagnac in France [13]. However,
since in a line-of-sight (LOS) environment the radio coverage
area of AeroMACS can be as large as 10 km [1], further
communications capabilities are offered by additional non-
surface related flight phases.
In this paper, we investigate the potential extension of
AeroMACS to the approach, landing, and take-off phases. In
doing so we will only focus on the forward link (FL), i.e.,
the link from the control tower to the aircraft. The reason
is that AeroMACS recommends that aircraft transmit data
only when they are on the ground, while data reception is
not limited to the surface contact. After examining the new
application scenarios and evaluating the main aspects of these
flight phases, we include a detailed coverage analysis and
channel modeling, which represents one major contribution
 2

TABLE I
of our work. However, since synchronization can represent L INK B UDGETS
a critical aspect in digital communications with high speed
vehicles, it is also important to check whether state-of- EIRPt RSS PLmax dmax
the-art PHY layer algorithms available for frame detection, [dBm] [dBm] [dB] [km]
Case 1 39 −89.37 128.37 12.21
timing/frequency recovery and channel estimation can cope Case 2 39 −85 124.37 7.383
with the new investigated flight phases. In this regard, the Case 3 29 −89.37 118.37 3.861
selection of appropriate synchronization schemes that may
achieve a reasonable trade-off between estimation accuracy
and system complexity represents a second contribution of this path loss is computed by applying the free-space path loss
study. When necessary, conventional synchronization methods (FSPL) equation, yielding
are slightly modified to either improve their robustness or
2
reduce their processing delay. The error-rate performance of

4πfc d
the system is eventually assessed by means of computer PL = (1)
c
simulations using the channel models developed for the new
application scenarios. where d is the distance between the transmit and receive
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In antennas, fc = 5.12 GHz represents the carrier frequency
Section II we analyze the new aircraft phases and derive the and c = 3 · 108 m/s is the speed of light. The radius of
corresponding channel parameters. A detailed analysis of the the coverage area, say dmax , is obtained from the previous
synchronization and channel estimation tasks is presented in equation by replacing PL with the maximum path loss
Section III. The error rate performance of AeroMACS in the PLmax allowed by the link budget. This produces
new scenarios is assessed in Section IV by means of computer
c p
simulations, while conclusions are offered in Section V. dmax = PLmax (2)
4πfc

II. C OVERAGE A NALYSIS AND C HANNEL PARAMETERS with

The approach, landing, and take-off phases [14] represent
critical aircraft transitions from the en-route (flying) period to
the touch down and vice versa. When instrument flight rules
(IFR)1 are adopted, the approach phase starts with the initial
approach fix (representing the first IFR sub-phase) [15], while
in case of visual flight rules (VFR) it starts from an altitude
of 1000 feet above the runway. In both cases, the approach
phase terminates at the beginning of the landing flare, i.e.,
when the nose of the plane is raised in order to slow down
the descent rate. The landing phase corresponds to the time
period spanning from the beginning of the landing flare until
the aircraft exits the runway or come to a stop on the runway.
Finally, the take-off corresponds to the period during which
the aircraft applies the take-off power and arrives at an altitude
of 35 feet above the runway.
The propagation channel between the control tower and the
aircraft is expected to considerably vary during these flight
phases as a consequence of the different altitudes and distances
of the aircraft with respect to the ground station. In this Section
we analyze the new propagation scenarios and derive the
corresponding channel parameters. Link-budget considerations
are also presented in order to assess whether the AeroMACS
base station is able to cover the areas relative to the ”new”
flight phases.
A. Coverage Considerations
The area covered by the AeroMACS ground station can be
estimated by focusing on the aerial zone. In such a case, the
1 An aircraft can be ruled according to visual flight rules or instrument flight
rules, the latter case enabling one to govern the aircraft under conditions in
which flight by outside visual reference would not be safe.
PLmax = EIRPt − RSS. (3)
In the above equation, RSS denotes the receiver sensitivity,
while EIRPt is the effective isotropic radiated power ex-
pressed by
EIRPt [dBm] = Pt [dBm] + AGt [dB] − CLt [dB], (4)
where Pt is the transmitted power per antenna element, AGt
represents the gain of the transmit antenna and CLt is the
cable loss at the transmitter side.
Assuming a QPSK modulation, a code rate of 1/2, AGt =
12 dB and CLt = 3 dB as specified in [16], we obtain the
link budgets summarized in Table I.
The three rows in the table correspond to three different
situations, referred to as Case 1, Case 2 and Case 3. In the
first one, the transmission power Pt is maximal (equivalent to
30 dBm), while the receiver sensitivity is −89.37 dBm [16].
Case 2 still corresponds to a maximal transmission power of
30 dBm, but the sensitivity is reduced to −85 dBm (equivalent
to the sensitivity of the C-band antenna that will be used in
the SANDRA final trials [2]). Finally, Case 3 represents the
configuration with the minimal transmission power of 20 dBm
and a sensitivity of −89.37 dBm. The results of Table I
indicate that the maximal distance of 12.21 km covered by the
AeroMACS BS is achieved in Case 1. As illustrated in Fig. 1,
the airport domain is defined as the area around the airport
having a diameter of 16.09 km and a height hA = 1.525 km
[17]. Hence, assuming that the ground station is positioned at
the center of the airport domain, the link budget corresponding
to Case 1 provides radio coverage of the whole airport domain.
In the other cases, a specified number of ground stations must
be arranged over the airport domain in order to guarantee full
radio coverage.

1.525km
16.09km
Fig. 1. Scheme of the airport domain.
B. Channel Scenarios
Due to the inherent transition nature of the approach, land-
ing and take-off phases, the propagation characteristics largely
vary during these periods, spanning over behaviors similar to
taxiing (i.e., when the aircraft is on the aerodrome surface prior
to take-off or after landing) and en-route scenarios (i.e., when
the aircraft is at the edge of the airport domain). In order to
simplify the channel characterization of the new investigated
flight phases, we hereafter focus on two different scenarios
called runway and airborne, respectively. The former describes
the period during which the aircraft is traveling at high speed
on the runway, while in the latter the aircraft is flying at the
edge of the airport domain. In the ensuing discussion, both
scenarios are described in detail.
1) Runway Scenario: This scenario encompasses both the
landing and take-off phases, wherein the aircraft is traveling
at high speed on the runway (either on the ground or at an
altitude of a few feet) as depicted in Fig. 2(a). The channel
response is characterized by a strong LOS path plus a small
number of reflected components. An exponentially decaying
power delay profile with delay spread στ = 1.05 µs is
assumed [18]. The amplitude of the LOS component has a
Rice distribution with factor R = 16 dB, while the amplitudes
of the reflected components are Rayleigh distributed. The
ratio between the power received from the LOS and the
average power arriving from the reflected waveforms is fixed
to K = 12 dB. Typical take-off speeds for jetliners are within
the range 130 − 160 knots (corresponding to 240 − 285 km/h),
while the landing speeds are somewhat smaller. In our study,
the aircraft speed in the runway scenario is fixed to v =
150 knots (277.5 km/h), which corresponds to a maximum
Doppler shift fdmax = fc · v/c = 1.32 kHz. The multi-path
propagation is implemented through a tapped delay line with
Nt taps, where each tap is characterized by a delay τk (with
k = 0, 1, . . . , Nt − 1) and a complex-valued fading coefficient
αk (t). The discrete-time received signal is thus expressed by
N
X t −1
r(nTc ) = x(nTc − τk ) · αk (nTc )
k=0
where Tc denotes the sampling period and x(nTc ) is the trans-
mitted signal. Each fading coefficient collects the contribution
3
(a) Runway (b) Airborne
Fig. 2. Schemes of the runway and airborne representative scenarios.
Δϕ
dLOS
dR
dI hA=1525m
hT=15m
θ
B=78m A=7966m
L=8045m
Fig. 3. Two paths scheme for the airborne scenario.
of Ns independent scatterers and is modeled as
Ns −1
1 X
αk (nTc ) = ck (nTc ) √ ej[2π(fl,k +fdk )nTc +θl,k ] (6)
Ns l=0
where ck (nTc ) is the time-varying tap gain of the kth mul-
tipath component and fdk the corresponding Doppler shift.
The quantities {fl,k } account for additional frequency shifts
introduced by the Ns scatterers and follow a Gaussian distribu-
tion with zero-mean. Finally, the phases {θl,k } are statistically
independent random variables with uniform distribution in the
interval [0, 2π). The main channel parameters of the runway
scenario are summarized in the second column of Table III.
2) Airborne Scenario: The airborne scenario is typical
of the approach phase and its propagation conditions are
substantially different from those characterizing the runway
period. The reason is that in such a case the reflected mul-
tipath components are expected to be very weak due to the
absence of any propagation obstacle during the aircraft flight.
Accordingly, the airborne scenario can be characterized by a
strong LOS component plus a single reflected path.
In our study, we adopt the geometrical 2-ray channel model
illustrated in Fig. 3 with θ = 10.8346◦ and assume that the
aircraft is positioned at the edge of the airport domain as as
shown in Fig. 2(b). Since we apply a free space propagation
model, the distances traveled by the two rays and the relative
propagation delays may be derived through the following
geometrical considerations. The length of the LOS path
(indicated in Fig. 3 by the continuous line) is given by
p
dLOS = (hA − hT )2 + L2 (7)
(5) where hT = 15 m and hA = 1525 m represent the height
of the control tower and the elevation of the aircraft with
respect to the ground. Furthermore, L = 8.045 km denotes
the radius of the airport domain, which coincides with
the distance between the control tower and the projection
 4

TABLE II
2- RAY MODEL PARAMETERS
αLOS(t)
τ0 n(t)
LOS Reflected path
x(t) y(t)
PL 1.756 · 106 1.757 · 106
Time of arrival t [µs] 27.28 27.3
∆τ (= τ − τLOS ) [ns] 0 18.62 α 2(t)
Distance traveled d [km] dLOS = 8.185 d2 = 8.191 τ0
∆d (= d − dLOS ) [m] ∆dLOS = 0 ∆d2 = 5.587

Fig. 4. Channel model scheme for the airborne scenario.

point of the aircraft on the ground. On the other hand, the TABLE III
distance d2 traveled by the reflected ray (represented with a C HANNEL PARAMETERS FOR THE RUNWAY AND AIRBORNE SCENARIOS
dashed line) is obtained as the sum of the distances dI and
dR traveled by the incident and reflected components, yielding Runway Airborne
# of taps 7 2
q q K [dB] 12 18
d2 = dI + dR = B 2 + h2T + A2 + h2A . (8) R [dB] 16 12
PDP EXP decaying according to K
The parameters of the two-ray geometrical model character- Tap amplitude (c0 0.99, c1 0.125)
izing the airborne scenario are summarized in Table II. We στ [µs] 1.05 (τ0 = τ1 = 0)
see that the reflected waveform arrives at the receiver with a Speed v [m/s] 77.2 102
fairly small differential delay ∆τ = τ2 − τLOS with respect fdmax [kHz] 1.32 1.74
to the LOS component as a consequence of the inequality fd U ∼ [−fdmax , fdmax ] fdmax
θ U ∼ [0, 2π) U ∼ [0, 2π)
hT ≪ hA . Hence, for the sake of simplicity, we can reasonably
Doppler spectrum Gaussian Dirac
let ∆τ = 0. σfD [Hz] between 20 and 100 0
We assume for this scenario the maximum speed vmax # of scatterers 25 25
allowed in the airport domain, which is equal to 200 knots
(or 370 km/h) [17]. This leads to a maximum Doppler shift
fdmax = 1.74 kHz. During the landing phase we can assume the lack of any movement). The taxiing scenario represents
that the aircraft is traveling straight toward the control tower the phase during which the aircraft is moving towards or from
and the Doppler shift associated to the LOS path is thus the gate. Speeds of 50 km/h are typical of this phase, as well
fdLOS = fdmax . In contrast, during the take-off phase we as the presence of a LOS component. This results into higher
have fdLOS = −fdmax as in such a case the aircraft moves Doppler shifts (fdmax = 150 Hz) and Rice factor values (K =
away from the control tower. The Doppler shift fd2 of the 5 dB) with respect to the parking scenario. A maximum value
second (reflected) path may be evaluated from Fig. 3 after of 1.5 µs is assumed for the channel delay spread.
computing the angle ∆φ between the two paths. Since the
aircraft is assumed to fly along the LOS direction, we have
III. S YNCHRONIZATION AND C HANNEL E STIMATION IN
fd2 = fdmax · cos ∆φ ≈ fdmax , where we have taken into
THE F ORWARD L INK
account that ∆φ = 2.8◦ and, accordingly, cos ∆φ ≃ 1.
The block diagram of the 2-ray geometrical channel model The AeroMACS adopts a multi-carrier air interface with
is sketched in Fig. 4. Here, the two paths are characterized N = 1024 subcarriers numbered from n = 0 to n = 1023.
by the same delay τ0 = 0 and the same maximum Doppler As it is known, synchronization and channel estimation play
shift. The processes αLOS (t) and α2 (t) account for the fading a major role in the design of a multi-carrier transmission
phenomenon on the direct and reflected paths, respectively. system [19]– [20]. In the AeroMACS, an aircraft that intends
The former has a Rice distribution, while the latter is Rayleigh to establish a communication link with the ground station
distributed. Both of them have a Dirac-shaped Doppler spec- collects the FL broadcast signal and performs the following
trum and are statistically independent. The Rice factor as- operations: 1) it checks whether a training block is present or
sociated to the direct path is R = 12 dB, while the ratio not in the received sample stream; 2) once the training block
between the average powers of αLOS (t) and α2 (t) is fixed to has been detected, it computes a timing estimate to identify the
K = 18 dB. The third column of Table III provides the main beginning of the FL frame; 3) it computes an estimate of the
channel parameters for the airborne scenario. fractional carrier frequency offset (FCFO); 4) it estimates the
3) Parking and Taxiing Scenarios: The natural application integer carrier frequency offset (ICFO) and identifies the BS
environment of AeroMACS is constituted by the parking and on the basis of the transmitted training block; 5) it performs
taxiing scenarios. The former describes the phase during which channel estimation and equalization by exploiting some pilot
the aircraft is parked close to the airport buildings. In this symbols. These functions are summarized in the block diagram
situation there is generally no direct path between the aircraft of the AeroMACS receiver shown in Fig. 5.
and the control tower since the LOS component is obscured In the sequel, we check whether state-of-the-art synchro-
by the presence of the buildings. Hence, in this scenario the nization and channel estimation algorithms can be applied to
channel can be modeled as a multipath propagation medium the AeroMACS FL and assess their performance when used
with low Rice factor (K = −3 dB) and slow fading (due to over the runway and airborne channel models described above.
 5

1.0 1.0
ICFO estimation
and
preamble identification 0.8 0.8

metric M1(d)
metric M(d)
0.6 0.6

r(k) frequency and

discard channel to data
timing DFT
CP equalization detection 0.4 0.4
correction

0.2 0.2

timing
detection of estimation
channel
0.0 0.0
the training - pilot
symbol FCFO symbols estimation 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000

estimation time index, d time index, d

(a) Metric M (d) for the runway sce- (b) Metric M1 (d) for the runway sce-
Fig. 5. OFDM receiver. nario. nario.
1.0

150

0.8

A. Detection of the Training Block

metric |γ(d)|
metric M1(d)
0.6 100

The training block is placed at the beginning of each FL

0.4
frame and has the structure illustrated in [6]. Specifically, it
50
is preceded by a cyclic prefix (CP) containing Ng = 128 0.2

samples and conveys a pseudo noise binary sequence which

0.0 0
modulates a subset of 284 subcarriers out of all the available 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 600 800 1000 1200 1400

time index, d time index, d

N = 1024 subcarriers. This sequence is selected among 114
(c) Metric M1 (d) for the taxiing sce- (d) Metric |γ̄(d)| for the runway sce-
possible choices to univocally identify the transmitting BS. nario. nario.
The indices of the modulated subcarriers are given by
Fig. 6. Examples of metrics for frame detection and timing estimation with
im = |η0 + 3m|N − 142 ≤ m ≤ 141 (9) SNR = 10 dB and Ng = 128.
where η0 ∈ {0, 1, 2} is an unknown parameter designating
the cell sector and the notation |·|N denotes the modulo-N
operation. The samples of the transmitted training block are An alternative scheme which is specifically devised for the
numbered from k = −Ng to k = N − 1 and take the form IEEE 802.16 standard has recently been suggested in [22].
This method exploits the conjugate symmetry property of the
141 training block which arises from the use of real-valued pilot
A X 2π
sp (k) = √ ap (m)ej N k(η0 +3m) (10) symbols, and replaces the quantity P (d) in (12) by
N m=−142
N −1
where ap = [ap (−142), ap (−141), . . . , ap (141)]T is the se-
X
P1 (d) = r(d + k)r(N − k + d) (14)
quence of pilot symbols belonging to the pth preamble
√ (with k=0
p = 0, 1, . . . , 113 and ap (m) = ±1), while A = 2 2 accounts
for the power boosting applied to the pilot tones. It is worth yielding a new metric M1 (d) = |P1 (d)| /R(d).
observing that the integer η0 is univocally determined by the Fig. 6(a) shows an example of M (d) as a function of
preamble index p. d when a silent period is followed by a training preamble
Inspection of (10) reveals that sp (k) would be a periodic plus four OFDM data blocks. The CP has length Ng = 128
sequence of period N/3 if N were chosen as a multiple of and the thermal noise is present with a signal-to-noise ratio
three. Although this is not true, in practice samples sp (k) taken (SNR) of 10 dB. These results are obtained numerically
at a distance of Nc = ⌊N/3⌋ = 341 are highly correlated. over a runway propagation channel and do not change if we
Hence, frame detection can be accomplished using the same consider an airborne or a taxiing scenario (not shown for
method that is applied in the presence of an OFDM training space limitations). As it is seen, the metric M (d) has a peak
block composed by several repeated parts. This leads to the in the neighborhood of the training preamble and exhibits
following metric [21] a plateau whose duration is approximately equal to the CP
length [23]. The metric M1 (d) is represented in Figs. 6(b)
|P (d)| and 6(c) for runway and taxiing applications, respectively.
M (d) = (11)
R(d) Although the plateau is no longer present, this metric is
characterized by several secondary peaks (especially in the
where
taxiing scenario), which may lead to a false detection of the
2N
X c −1 frame boundary. Furthermore, while the quantity P (d) can be
P (d) = r∗ (d + k)r(d + k + Nc ) (12) efficiently computed through the following recursion
k=0
P (d) = P (d − 1) + r∗ (d + 2Nc )r(d + 3Nc )−
and
− r∗ (d − 1)r(d − 1 + Nc ) (15)
2N c −1
2
X
R(d) = |r(d + k)| . (13) involving only two complex multiplication and two complex
k=0 additions, the summation in the right-hand-side of (14) does

0
10
Pmd, taxiing
Pfa
10
-1
theory
10
-2 Pmd, airborne
-3 Pmd, runway
10
-4
10
-5
10
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6
threshold, λ0
Fig. 7. Pfa and Pmd as a function of λ0 for SNR = 0 dB.
not lend itself to any efficient recursive implementation and
needs N complex multiplications plus N complex additions
for each value of d. Due to its remarkable advantage in terms
of processing load, in the sequel we adopt the conventional
metric M (d) expressed in (11) and declare a frame detec-
tion whenever M (d) exceeds a suitable threshold λ0 . More
precisely, assume that M (d0 − 1) < λ0 and M (d0 ) > λ0 .
Then, a frame detection is declared at d = d0 , after which the
receiver starts a synchronization procedure to acquire timing
and frequency information as illustrated later. The threshold
λ0 must be designed so as to achieve a good trade off between
the false alarm probability Pfa and the misdetection probability
Pmd . A common approach for the threshold design is based
on the Neyman-Pearson criterion [24], according to which λ0
is selected on the basis of a target Pfa . It can be shown that
the false alarm probability is approximately given by [25]
Pfa = exp(−2λ20 Nc )
and turns out to be independent of pthe SNR level. Solving (16)
with respect to λ0 yields λ0 = ln(1/Pfa )/2Nc , which can
be used to select the threshold that corresponds to a specified
false alarm probability.
In Fig. 7 we report numerical measurements illustrating Pfa
and Pmd as a function of the threshold λ0 for both the runway
and the airborne scenarios when the SNR is fixed to 0 dB. The
performance obtained in the taxiing scenario is also shown
for comparison. We see that Pfa is virtually independent of
the operating scenario and attains the theoretical performance,
while Pmd is largely affected by the propagation environment.
Assume for example that a Pfa of 10−10 is required, which
corresponds to λ0 = 0.185 in (16). In such a case, we see that
Pmd is approximately 10−4 for the taxiing scenario, while it is
much smaller for both the runway and airborne scenarios. The
reason is that in the latter two cases a LOS propagation model
is basically assumed, while in the taxiing case the multipath
phenomenon is more severe. As it is seen, the best results are
obtained in the airborne case. This was largely expected, as this
6
scenario is characterized by only two multipath components
with a Rice factor as large as 18 dB, which makes it very
similar to the AWGN channel model.
B. Timing Estimation
Once the presence of a new frame has been detected,
the receiver starts a timing synchronization procedure which
identifies the beginning of each OFDM block. Unfortunately,
M (d) cannot provide reliable timing information since the
plateau region shown in Fig. 6(a) reduces its localization
capability. On the other hand, when using M1 (d) there is a
Ng=128 serious risk that a local maximum occasionally overcomes the
SNR = 0dB
main peak positioned at the beginning of the OFDM block,
thereby resulting into a large timing error (outlier). Such a
0.8 1.0
situation is likely to occur at low SNR values in the presence of
severe multipath propagation (taxiing scenario). An alternative
approach for timing estimation in multi-carrier systems relies
on the autocorrelation properties that the cyclic prefix induces
on the time domain samples [26]. In such a case, the following
N -lag autocorrelation function is used as a timing metric
Ng −1
X
γ(d) = r(d + k + N )r∗ (d + k) (17)
k=0
for d0 + 1 ≤ d ≤ d0 + NT , where NT = N + Ng is
the block length (including the CP) expressed in sampling
intervals. Since the CP is just a duplication of the last Ng
samples of the OFDM block, the quantity |γ(d)| exhibits a
peak whenever the samples r(d + k) with 0 ≤ k ≤ Ng − 1
belong to the CP. In applications where the CP length Ng is
relatively small, accurate timing recovery may be difficult to
be gained as a consequence of the short integration window
employed in (17). A possible remedy to this drawback consists
of averaging γ(d) over a specified number MB of OFDM
blocks. This produces the following modified metric
MX
B −1
γ̄(d) = γ(d + mNT ) (18)
(16)
m=0
in which γ(d) is still computed as in (17). The timing estimate
is eventually found by locating the global maximum of |γ̄ (d)|
over a time interval I = [d0 + 1, d0 + NT ], i.e.,
dˆ = arg max {|γ̄(d)|} . (19)
d∈I
Fig. 6(d) reports |γ̄(d)| as a function of the time index d for
Ng = 128, MB = 1 and SNR = 10 dB when the runway
scenario is considered2. As we can see, |γ̄(d)| is characterized
by a sharp peak positioned at the beginning of the received
OFDM block and does not exhibit neither a plateau region
nor secondary maxima. Due to such favourable features, this
metric is employed for timing estimation in the AeroMACS.
Figs. 8(a) and 8(b) illustrate the probability density function
(PDF) of dˆ as obtained with MB = 1 and MB = 4,
respectively. The SNR is fixed to 0 dB. In these experiments,
the value d = 0 corresponds to the first sample of the CP
2 Regarding the timing estimation task, the accuracy in the airborne scenario
is similar to that in the runway scenario and is not shown for space limitations.
 7

0.5 -1
10
0.35

0.30
0.4

standard deviation in the frequency estimation

pdf of timing estimate
pdf of timing estimate

0.25

0.3
0.20

0.15
0.2

0.10

0.1
0.05
-2
10
0.00 0.0
-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30

time index, d time index, d

(a) MB = 1. (b) MB = 4.
theory
AWGN (PTI)
Fig. 8. PDF of the timing estimates for the runway channel when MB = 1 taxiing
airborne MB=1
(a) and MB = 4 (b).
runway Ng=128

-3
10
0 5 10 15 20
and represents the correct timing instant. As it is seen, the SNR, dB
PDF becomes narrower when passing from MB = 1 to
MB = 4 and in both cases its expected value is placed at Fig. 9. Standard deviation of the FCFO estimates vs. SNR with MB = 1
the start of the OFDM symbol (i.e., at d = 0). Conversely, and Ng = 128.
in a taxiing environment (see [27] for more details) the PDF
mean is delayed by a few samples with respect to d = 0 as a
consequence of the increased time dispersion. of ε can also be computed as
It is worth recalling that interblock interference (IBI) is
present during the payload section of the frame whenever the 1 n
ˆ
o
ε̂ = arg γ̄(d) (21)
timing estimate dˆ lies outside the interval Jd = [L − 1, Ng ], 2π
where L is the length of the channel impulse response (CIR)
ˆ represents the timing metric evaluated at the time
where γ̄(d)
expressed in sampling intervals. Hence, an effective method
ˆ
instant d specified in (19), while arg{x} denotes the principal
for reducing the IBI power consists of pre-advancing dˆ so as
to place the expected value of the timing estimate in the middle value of the argument of x. In the absence of IBI, it can be
point of Jd , which is given by (L − 1 + Ng )/2. This leads to shown that ε̂ is unbiased with variance [25]
the refined timing estimate dˆ(f ) = dˆ− E{d̂} + (L − 1 + Ng )/2. 1

1

−1 −2
Numerical results indicate that E{d} ˆ coincides with the mean var{ε̂} = SNR + SNR . (22)
4π 2 MB Ng 2
channel delay spread and, accordingly, it is generally unknown
to the receiver. As suggested in [21], a possible solution is to Clearly, the estimate (21) comes for free since the quantity
replace E{d}ˆ with the quantity (L − 1)/2, which amounts to ˆ is already available from the previous timing estimation
γ̄(d)
assuming a uniform power delay profile over the time interval step. Hence, in an attempt of reducing the processing load as
[0, L − 1]. This leads to the final timing estimate much as possible, we suggest to recover the FCFO as shown in
(21), thereby avoiding the extra computational burden required
dˆ(f ) = dˆ + Ng /2 (20) by the method in [28].
which is eventually employed for a correct positioning of the Figs. 9 and 10 illustrate the standard deviation of ε̂ as
receive discrete Fourier transform (DFT) window. a function of the SNR under different operating situations.
The number of employed OFDM blocks is MB = 1 in
Fig. 9 and MB = 4 in Fig. 10. The thick solid line reports
C. Estimation of the Fractional Frequency Offset the theoretical performance, while marks indicate simulation
After frame detection and timing acquisition, the aircraft results. Measurements obtained with an AWGN channel model
receiver terminal computes a coarse frequency estimate so as and in the presence of perfect timing information (PTI) val-
to align its local oscillator to the received carrier frequency. idate the analysis in (22) as in this case the samples used
In multi-carrier applications, it is expedient to decompose the to compute γ̄(d) in (18) are free from IBI. On the other
frequency error into an integer part µ, which is multiple of hand, in the presence of multipath propagation (runway and
the subcarrier spacing ∆f , plus a remaining fractional part ε taxiing channel models) the estimation accuracy departs from
less than ∆f /2 in magnitude. The acquisition of the FCFO ε the theoretical curve and exhibits an irreducible floor due to
is performed first, while the problem of estimating the ICFO the insurgence of IBI. The best performance is obtained in the
µ is addressed later. airborne scenario, although it is characterized by the highest
An efficient method to retrieve the FCFO from the IEEE aircraft speed. The reason is that in such a case the signal is
802.16 training preamble is presented in [28]. This scheme received from a single path, which means that the incoming
exploits the correlations of the received time-domain samples samples are not impaired by IBI while the doppler spread
with lags Nc and N − Nc , and its accuracy is close to the only reduces to a doppler shift which is easily detected by the
relevant Cramer-Rao bound (CRB) at SNR values of practical frequency recovery unit. As expected, we see that the standard
interest. As indicated in [26] and [29], however, an estimate deviation decreases as MB grows large.
 8

-1
10
standard deviation in the frequency estimation frequency-domain samples can be written as
X(n) = AH(n + µ)bp (n + µ)e−j2πδd (n+µ)/N + W (n) (23)
√
where A = 2 2 is the power boosting factor and bp (n) is the
(ZP )
periodic repetition of ap (n) with period N . Also, W (n) is
the contribution of the thermal noise while δd is the residual
-2
10 timing error, which appears as a linear phase shift across the
subcarriers. As anticipated, we aim at jointly estimating the
ICFO µ ∈ Jµ and the training index p ∈ Jp = {0, 1, . . . , 113}.
theory The proposed approach consists of looking for the global
AWGN (PTI)
taxiing
maximum of the objective function
airborne MB=4 2
runway Ng=128
N −1
X 
-3
10
∗
Φ(µ̃, p̃) =  Yp̃ (n; µ̃)Yp̃ (n − 3; µ̃) (24)
 
0 5 10 15 20  
n=3
SNR, dB
with respect to (µ̃, p̃) ∈ Jµ ×Jp , where Yp̃ (n; µ̃) is the product
Fig. 10. Standard deviation of the FCFO estimates vs. SNR with MB = 4
of the DFT output with the hypothesized shifted sequence
and Ng = 128. bp̃ (n + µ̃), i.e, Yp̃ (n; µ̃) = X(n)bp̃ (n + µ̃). The estimated
values of µ and p are thus given by
(µ̂, p̂) = arg max {Φ(µ̃, p̃)} . (25)
D. Estimation of the Integer Frequency Offset and Preamble (µ̃,p̃)∈Jµ ×Jp
Identification
It is worth noting that the objective function in (24) resem-
In the AeroMACS system, the subcarrier spacing is ∆f = bles the metric proposed in [30], which takes the form
10.94 kHz, while the carrier frequency is approximately
5.12 GHz. Assuming an overall oscillator instability of ±2 (N −1 )
parts per million (ppm) at both the transmit and receive ends
X
Φ1 (µ̃, p̃) = ℜe Yp̃ (n; µ̃)Yp̃∗ (n − 3; µ̃) . (26)
as specified in [6], the maximum frequency offset between n=3
the received carrier and the local oscillator frequencies is
Substituting (23) into (24) and neglecting for simplicity the
±20 kHz, which corresponds to f∆ = ±1.83. This means that
thermal noise W (n), it turns out that Φ(µ̃, p̃) is independent
the ICFO takes values in the set Jµ = {±2, ±1, 0} and must
of δd , while the same property does not hold for Φ1 (µ̃, p̃).
be estimated in some manner. In addition to ICFO recovery,
Based on this observation, we expect that our proposed method
another task that the receiver has to accomplish is the identifi-
may exhibit increased resilience against residual timing errors
cation of the received training preamble in order to univocally
compared to the conventional scheme in [30]. Numerical
specify the transmitting BS. As mentioned in Section III-A,
simulations (not shown for space limitations) validate such
the training preamble is selected among 114 possible choices
an intuition.
and is characterized by a pseudo noise sequence of 284 BPSK
In order to assess the performance of the estimator (25),
symbols.
we consider the probability that (µ̂, p̂) does not coincide with
We now illustrate a method for jointly estimating the ICFO
the true value (µ, p), say Pe = Pr {(µ̂, p̂) 6= (µ, p)}. Figs. 11
and the transmitted preamble sequence. This method is based
and 12 illustrate Pe as a function of the SNR with MB = 1
on the conventional approach presented in [30], but it exhibits
and MB = 4, respectively. In particular, we observe that when
improved robustness against residual timing errors. We begin
MB = 1 the proposed scheme has similar performance in
by using the timing estimate dˆ(f ) provided in (20) in order
all the considered application scenarios, although the curves
to select the N samples belonging to the received training
pertaining to the airborne and runway set-ups are characterized
preamble, say r(k + dˆ(f ) ) with k = 0, 1, . . . , N − 1. Next,
by a steeper slope as a consequence of their LOS nature.
we counter-rotate the samples r(k + dˆ(f ) ) at an angular speed
Clearly, increasing MB from 1 to 4 leads to a significant
2πε̂/N so as to compensate for the FCFO. The resulting
reduction of Pe .
frequency-corrected samples are then fed to an N -point DFT
unit.
To proceed further, we consider the situation where the E. Channel Estimation
pth training preamble ap (m); −142 ≤ m ≤ 141 has been In the FL of the AeroMACS, the active subcarriers (carrying
transmitted (with p = 0, 1, . . . , 113) and define the following data or pilot) are divided into physical clusters containing
zero-padded sequence 14 adjacent subcarriers over 2 consecutive OFDM blocks.
 In each block, 2 subcarriers are reserved for pilots, while
ap (m) if n = im
a(ZP
p
)
(n) = the remaining 12 subcarriers are used for data transmission.
0 otherwise
Fig. 13 illustrates the cluster structure and the position of
with im = |η0 +3m|N for −142 ≤ m ≤ 141. Then, assuming the pilot subcarriers, which is different for even and odd
ideal FCFO compensation and recalling that the ICFO results OFDM blocks. The classical approach for pilot-aided channel
into a shift of the subcarrier indices at the DFT output, the estimation in OFDM systems consists of the following two
 9

0
10
Ng=128

Time
MB=1
-1 taxiing
10
airborne
runway

Frequency
-2
10
pilot data
Pe

-3
10
Fig. 13. Structure of the AeroMACS cluster in the forward link.

-4
10
the channel response over the considered cluster varies linearly
in both the time and frequency directions. This amounts to
-5
10 putting
-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4
Ĥk (n) = ak + bn + c (27)
SNR, dB

where (a, b, c) are suitable coefficients that must be estimated

Fig. 11. Probability of an estimation failure vs. SNR with MB = 1 and according to some optimization criterion using the channel
Ng = 128. estimates at the pilot positions. The latter are given by

0
Xm (p)
10 Ĥm (p) = (28)
Ng=128 cm (p)
MB=4
-1 taxiing where (m, p) are the time-frequency coordinates of
10 airborne
runway
the available pilot tones, which belong to the set
{(0, 0); (1, 4); (1, 8); (0, 12)}. Resorting to the least squares
-2 approach yields [25]
10

1h i
Pe

â = −Ĥ0 (0) + Ĥ1 (4) + Ĥ1 (8) − Ĥ0 (12) , (29)

10
-3 2
1 h i
b̂ = −3Ĥ0 (0) − Ĥ1 (4) + Ĥ1 (8) + 3Ĥ0 (12) (30)
-4
40
10
and
1 h i
10
-5 ĉ = 19Ĥ0 (0) + 3Ĥ1 (4) − 3Ĥ1 (8) + Ĥ0 (12) . (31)
20
-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4

SNR, dB
The channel estimates over the considered cluster are com-
puted through (27) after replacing (a, b, c) with (â, b̂, ĉ).
Fig. 12. Probability of an estimation failure vs. SNR with MB = 4 and Compared to [31] and [32], the proposed method allows one to
Ng = 128. start the channel estimation process as soon as the considered
cluster has been received.

steps. First, the channel transfer function is recovered at the
pilot positions. Interpolation techniques are next employed
to obtain the channel response over the information-bearing
subcarriers. For multicarrier systems employing the IEEE
802.16 pilot grid shown in Fig.13, linear interpolation in the
time direction is firstly suggested to reconstruct the channel
frequency response over the 1st, 5th, 9th and 13th subcarrier
of each cluster [31], [32]. A frequency domain interpolation is
subsequently applied to recover the channel response over all
remaining subcarriers. Albeit effective, this approach entails
some processing delay since interpolation along the time axis
can be accomplished only after the complete reception of two
successively transmitted clusters. In order to avoid such a
processing delay, we suggest to perform channel estimation
on a cluster-by-cluster basis as it is now illustrated.
To simplify the notation, we focus on a single cluster and
consider two consecutive blocks with time index k = 0, 1 and
frequency index n = 0, 1, . . . , 13. In addition, we assume that
IV. B IT E RROR R ATE P ERFORMANCE
The BER performance of the AeroMACS system has been
assessed by means of computer simulations using the channel
models discussed in Section II. The transceiver architecture is
based on the IEEE 802.16 standard for wireless metropolitan
area networks [6]. Specifically, the information bits are fed
to the industry-standard convolutional code with rate 1/2 and
generator polynomial (131, 171). The coded bits are next
passed to a bit-interleaver and mapped onto 4-QAM or 16-
QAM constellation symbols. The interleaver operates in two
steps. The first one ensures that adjacent bits are mapped onto
channel symbols allocated over nonadjacent subcarriers, while
the second step ensures that adjacent bits occupy different
positions in the binary sequence that identifies the channel
symbol. The DFT size is N = 1024, while the number
of modulated subcarriers is 840. The latter are divided into
30 subchannels, each composed by two nonadjacent clusters
which are assigned to the active users. Two boundary cases
 10

TABLE IV 10
0

S YSTEM PARAMETERS OF THE SELECTED A ERO MACS PROFILE

S1 scenario
4-QAM
Parameter Ng=128
MB = 2
-1
10
Carrier frequency 5091 − 5150 MHz
Transmissione bandwidth 10 MHz
FFT size 1024 ESP
10
-2
PCK
Sampling factor 28/25
taxiing
Sampling frequency 11.2 MHz

BER
airborne
Guard interval 11.42 µs runway
-3
OFDM symbol duration 102.84 µs 10

Subcarrier spacing 10.94 kHz

-4
10

have been investigated. In the first one, which we denote by

Scenario 1 (S1), the BS assigns all subchannels to a single 10
-5
0 5 10 15 20
user. This provides the user with the maximum degree of
frequency diversity as its data are distributed across all the Eb/N0

available bandwidth. In the second case, which is referred to

as Scenario 2 (S2), each user gets only one subchannel and, ac- Fig. 14. BER of a 4-QAM system in the S1 scenario.
cordingly, it is expected to experience much less diversity gain 0
10
as compared to S1. The main system parameters employed in
S2 scenario
the software simulations are summarized in Table IV. 4-QAM
Ng=128
Figs. 14 and 15 illustrate the BER in case of a 4-QAM
MB = 2
-1
10
constellation as a function of Eb /N0 , where Eb is the average
received energy per information bit, while N0 is the one-
sided noise power spectral density. The curve labeled ESP 10
-2

(Estimated Signal Parameters) is obtained in the presence

BER

of both channel and synchronization errors, while the PCK

-3
10
(Perfect Channel Knowledge) curve refers to an ideal receiver
which is provided with the true channel frequency response ESP
over each subcarrier and it is used as a benchmark. Compared PCK
taxiing
-4
10
to the PCK scenario, all the considered schemes entail a airborne
loss of approximately 2 dB, which may be interpreted as the runway
degradation induced by channel estimation errors. It is worth 10
-5
0 5 10 15 20
noting that a loss between 2 and 3 dB was also found in
Eb/N0
[32] using the conventional channel estimator for the IEEE
802.16 pilot grid. Other simulations (not shown for space
limitations) indicate that the timing and frequency recovery Fig. 15. BER of a 4-QAM system in the S2 scenario.
schemes adopted in this work do not entail any significant
loss in terms of BER performance with respect to a perfectly
synchronized system. From Fig. 14 we see that the curves apply to a 16-QAM constellation as well, whose performance
obtained in the airborne and runway scenarios exhibit a steeper is shown in Figs. 16 and 17.
slope as compared to the taxiing set-up. This result, which was
also found in the preamble identification and in the estimation V. C ONCLUSIONS
of the integer frequency offset, can be explained by observing We have investigated the potential extension of AeroMACS
that the taxiing channel is more severely affected by multipath to novel operational stages, including the landing, take-off
fading. Such a concept is reinforced by the results of Fig. 15, and approach phases of an aircraft flight. The discussion has
where the loss of the frequency diversity gain when passing been focused on the forward link (i.e, from the control tower
from S1 to S2 is considerably greater for the taxiing scenario to the aircraft), since AeroMACS specifies that the aircraft
than for the airborne and runway channels. Indeed, for BER can transmit data only when it is on the ground. Two main
= 10−4 the loss in terms of Eb /N0 is on the order of 1 dB situations emerged: (1) the runway scenario, encompassing
for the runway and airborne channels, while it increases to both the landing and take-off phases for aircraft speeds up
7 dB in the taxiing scenario. The reason is that, while the to 160 knots; and (2) the airborne scenario, which can handle
taxiing environment is particularly sensitive to the diversity even higher speeds and is suited for the approach phase. The
gain due to its severe Rayleigh distributed multipath fading, the main peculiarities of these scenarios have been highlighted and
same does not occur with the runway and airborne scenarios, the corresponding channel parameters have been derived for
which have characteristics similar to an AWGN channel and the computer analysis.
their performance is thus close to the benchmark even in the Particular attention has been paid to the synchronization
S2 case. All the considerations made for the 4-QAM system task, which represents a major challenge in digital transmis-
 11

"
!"
ESP
where the relatively high Rice factors characterizing the run-
S1 scenario
PCK 16-QAM way and airborne environments result into error curves with
taxi
!"#$$%&' Ng=128
landing-takeoff
increased slope as compared to the taxiing scenario. Residual
MB = 2
#!
!" "$()*(%+'
runway
(,%-".' channel estimation errors lead to a loss of approximately
2 dB in terms of Eb /N0 , while the loss induced by residual
!"
#'
synchronization errors is negligible.
In summary, our study clearly indicates that, although origi-
()*

nally conceived for ground applications, the use of AeroMACS

#&
!" can be extended to cover new operational phases wherein
aircraft can receive data from the control tower even when
#%
they are not on the airport surface.
!"

R EFERENCES
#$
[1] J. M. Budinger and E. Hall, Future Aeronautical Communications.
!" InTech, 2011, ch. Aeronautical Mobile Airport Communications System
" $ !" !$ '"
(AeroMACS), p. 28, Editor: S. Plass, ISBN 978-953-307-625-6.
)+,-"
[2] S. Plass, “Seamless networking for aeronautical communications: One
major aspect of the SANDRA concept,” IEEE Aerosp. Electron. Syst.
Fig. 16. BER of a 16-QAM system in the S1 scenario. Mag,, vol. 27, no. 9, pp. 21–27, Sept. 2012.
[3] ”Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen)”. [Online].
Available: http://www.faa.gov/nextgen/.
"
!" [4] ”Single European Sky ATM Research (SESAR)”. [Online]. Available:
S2 scenario http://www.sesarju.eu/.
16-QAM [5] Advisory Council for Aviation Research and Innovation in Europe
Ng=128 (ACARE), “Strategic Research & Innovation Agenda,” ACARE, Tech.
MB = 2
#!
!"
Rep. Volume 1, Sept. 2012.
[6] IEEE 802.16-2009, “Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area Net-
works - Part 16: Air Interface for Fixed Broadband Wireless Access
!"
#' Systems,” 2009.
[7] G. Liva, P. Pulini, and M. Chiani, “Flexible On-line Construction of IRA
()*

Codes for Packet Erasure Correction with Application to Aeronautical

#&
!"
ESP
PCK
taxi
#%
!" !"#$$%&'
landing-takeoff
"$()*(%+'
runway
(,%-".'
!"
#$
" $ !" !$
)+,-"
Fig. 17. BER of a 16-QAM system in the S2 scenario.
sions with high-speed user terminals. State-of-the-art algo-
rithms for frame detection, timing and fractional frequency
recovery have been selected due to their advantages in terms
of processing requirements with respect to more sophisticated
schemes specifically devised for the IEEE 802.16 standard. A
slight modification of the conventional methods for integer
frequency recovery, base station identification and channel
estimation have been suggested to improve their performance
in terms of robustness against residual timing errors and
processing delay. The accuracy of the synchronization schemes
has been assessed numerically in the new application scenarios
and compared with that pertaining to the taxiing set-up. It
has been found that satisfactory performance can be obtained
by properly designing the number of OFDM blocks used for
timing and frequency recovery. In any case, the proposed
synchronization algorithms have provided better results in the
runway and airborne scenarios than in the taxiing case due to
the inherent LOS nature of the new operational flight stages.
Such behavior is also reflected in the bit error rate analysis,
Communications,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Commun., Kyoto, Japan,
Jun. 2011.
[8] P. Pulini and M. Chiani, “Improving the Forward Link of the Future Air-
port Data Link by Space-Time Coding,” in Proc. InOwO’10, Hamburg,
Germany, Sept. 2010.
[9] ——, “Improving the performance of AeroMACS by cooperative com-
munications,” in Proc. Digital Avionics System Conference, DASC 30th,
Seattle, WG, US, Oct. 2011.
[10] P. Pulini, G. Liva, and M. Chiani, “Protograph EXIT Analysis over
'"
Block Fading Channels with Application to Relays,” in Proc. of ICC’12,
Ottawa, CA, June 2012.
[11] G. Bartoli, R. Fantacci, D. Marabissi, L. Micciullo, and M. Fossi, “An
efficient subcarrier allocation method for AeroMACS-based communi-
cation systems,” IEEE Trans. Aerospace and Electronic Systems, vol. 49,
no. 2, pp. 786–797, Apr. 2013.
[12] W. Hall and N. Zelkin, “Status of AeroMACS prototype mobility test
and evaluation,” ICAO ACP-WGS01, Tech. Rep., Mar. 2012.
[13] S. Plass, “SANDRA Flight Trials Concept, Validation, and Results,” in
Proc. Digital Avionics System Conference, DASC 32nd, Syracuse, NY,
US, Oct. 2013.
[14] International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), “ICAO.” [Online].
Available: http://aviationglossary.com
[15] C. ICAO, “Phase of Flight, Definitions and Us-
age Notes,” CAST/ICAO Common Taxonomy Team,
http://www.intlaviationstandards.org/Documents/PhaseofFlightDefinitions.pdf,
Tech. Rep., Apr. 2013.
[16] SANDRA, “SANDRA D6.1.2: Airport Data Link Requirements,” EU,
Project Report 6.1.2, 2010.
[17] EUROCONTROL/FAA Future communications study operational con-
cepts and requirements team, “Communications Operating Concept and
Requirements for the Future Radio System (COCR),” EUROCON-
TROL/FAA, Tech. Rep. Version 2.
[18] S. Gligorevic, R. Zierhut, T. Jost and W. Wang, “Airport Channel
Measurement at 5.2 GHz,” in Proc. EuCAP 2009, Berlin, Germany,
Mar. 2009.
[19] M. Morelli, C.-C. J. Kuo, and M.-O. Pun, “Synchronization techniques
for orthogonal frequency-division multiple-access (OFDMA): A tutorial
review,” Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 95, no. 7, pp. 1394 – 1427, July
2007.
[20] L. Sanguinetti and M. Morelli, “An initial ranging scheme for the IEEE
802.16 OFDMA uplink,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communica-
tions, vol. 11, no. 9, pp. 3204 – 3215, Sept. 2012.
 12

[21] H. Minn, V. Bhargava, and K. Letaief, “A robust timing and frequency

synchronization for OFDM systems,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless
Communications, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 822 – 839, July 2003.
[22] K. Pushpa, C. Kishore, and Y. Yoganandam, “A new method for frame
synchronization in OFDMA mode of WMAN,” in IEEE Region 10
Conference TENCON 2008, 2008, pp. 1 – 6.
[23] T. Schmidl and D. Cox, “Robust frequency and timing synchronization
for OFDM,” IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 45, no. 12,
pp. 1613 – 1621, Dec. 1997.
[24] H. V. Poor, An Introduction to Signal Detection and Estimation, 2nd ed.
New York: Springer, 1994.
[25] SANDRA, “SANDRA D6.2.3: Report on long term AeroMACS evolu-
tion,” EU, Project Report 6.2.3, 2012.
[26] J. van de Beek, M. Sandell, and P. Borjesson, “ML estimation of time
and frequency offset in OFDM systems,” IEEE Trans. Signal Proc.,
vol. 45, no. 7, pp. 1800 – 1805, July 1997.
[27] SANDRA, “SANDRA D6.2.1: Report on Modeling and Performance
Simulations,” EU, Project Report 6.2.1, 2011.
[28] M. Ruan, M. Reed, and Z. Shi, “A universal frequency offset estimator
for OFDM applications,” in Proc. of IEEE Global Telecommunications
Conference, 2009, pp. 1 – 5.
[29] T. Hurnanen, J. Poikonen, and J. Paavola, “Coarse time- and frequency
synchronization applied in a mobile WiMAX system,” in Proceedings
of the 6th international conference on Symposium on Wireless Commu-
nication Systems, ser. ISWCS’09. Piscataway, NJ, USA: IEEE Press,
2009, pp. 230 – 233.
[30] F. Suliman, N. Elhassan, and T. Ibrahim, “Frequency offset estimation
and cell search algorithms for OFDMA based mobile WiMAX,” in
14th International Conference on Advanced Communication Technology,
2012, pp. 1128 – 1131.
[31] S. Galih, R. Karlina, F. Nugroho, A. Irawan, T. Adiono, and A. Kurni-
awan, “High mobility data pilot based channel estimation for downlink
OFDMA system based on IEEE 802.16e standard,” in International
Conference on Electrical Engineering and Informatics, vol. 02, 2009,
pp. 478 – 483.
[32] M. Mohamad, M. Saeed, and A. Priantoro, “Downlink channel es-
timation and tracking in mobile WiMAX systems,” in International
Conference on Computer and Communication Engineering, 2008, pp.
1340 – 1343.

View publication stats