Scientific Journal of Silesian University of Technology.

Series Transport
Zeszyty Naukowe Politechniki Śląskiej. Seria Transport

Volume 98 2018

p-ISSN: 0209-3324

e-ISSN: 2450-1549

DOI: https://doi.org/10.20858/sjsutst.2018.98.7

Journal homepage: http://sjsutst.polsl.pl

Article citation information:

Krasuski, K., Ćwiklak, J. Application of the DGPS method for the precise positioning of
an aircraft in air transport. Scientific Journal of Silesian University of Technology. Series
Transport. 2018, 98, 65-79. ISSN: 0209-3324. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.20858/sjsutst.2018.98.7.

Kamil KRASUSKI1, Janusz ĆWIKLAK2

APPLICATION OF THE DGPS METHOD FOR THE PRECISE

POSITIONING OF AN AIRCRAFT IN AIR TRANSPORT

Summary. This article presents research results concerning the determination of

the position of a Cessna 172 aircraft by means of the DGPS positioning method.
The position of the aircraft was recovered on the basis of P1/P2 code observations
in the GPS navigation system. The coordinates of the aircraft were designated due
to the application of the Kalman forward-filtering method. The numerical
calculations were conducted using RTKLIB software in the RTKPOST module.
In the scientific experiment, the authors used research materials from the test
flight conducted by a Cessna 172 aircraft in the area of Dęblin in the Lublin
Voivodeship in south-eastern Poland. The research experiment exploited
navigation data and GPS observation data recorded by the geodetic Topcon Hiper
Pro receiver mounted in the cockpit of the Cessna 172 and installed on the REF1
reference station. The typical accuracy for recovering the position of the Cessna
172 with the DGPS method exceeds in the region of 2 m. In addition, the authors
specify the parameters of availability, integrity and continuity of GNSS satellite
positioning in air navigation. The obtained findings of the scientific experiment
were compared with the International Civil Aviation Organization’s (ICAO’s)
technical standards.

1
Faculty of Geodesy, Cartography and Cadastre, District Office of Ryki, Wyczółkowskiego 10A Street, 08-500
Ryki, Poland. Email: [email protected].
2
Polish Air Force Academy, Faculty of Aviation, Dywizjonu 303 nr 35 Street, 08-521 Dęblin, Poland. Email:
[email protected].
66 K. Krasuski, J. Ćwiklak

Keywords: air navigation, air transport, DGPS method, accuracy, ICAO,

Kalman filter, integrity

1. INTRODUCTION

The DGPS positioning technique refers to a differential measurement approach, which

can be executed both in near real time and in postprocessing. The DGPS measurement
method requires a rover receiver and a base reference station from the user. In near real time,
the coordinates of the rover receiver’s antenna are determined on the basis of differential
corrections sent via the NTRIP protocol in the RTCM format from the service of the reference
station’s network [12]. In the case of calculations during postprocessing, the coordinates of a
rover receiver are determined on the basis of registered raw GNSS satellite observations by
the rover receiver and the base reference station. In the DGPS measurement technique, mostly
single-frequency (or dual-frequency) code observations are used from one or more GNSS
navigation systems [3].
In practice, the DGPS positioning technique allows for reducing or eliminating a number
of systematic errors in GNSS satellite measurements. Systematic errors that are related to the
satellite clock and the receiver are completely eliminated in the DGPS method. In this way, it
is possible to remove the satellite clock error correction, the receiver clock error correction,
the relativistic satellite clock correction, TGD hardware delay for the satellite and the RDCB
instrumental bias for the receiver. On the other hand, the impact of the ionosphere correction
and the troposphere correction is reduced at the differentiation stage for the observation
equations of the mathematical model [2]. It is worth mentioning that, in the DGPS
measurements, it is crucial to determine the characteristics of the antenna of the rover receiver
and the base reference station.
The DGPS measurement method is used for positioning in static and kinematic modes. In
the kinematic mode, the method of DGPS positioning provides, for example, the designation
of the precise position of the aircraft in air navigation [6]. The recovery of a reliable aircraft
position affects the improvement in the safety of air operations in airspace. In addition, the
technique of DGPS positioning is important in the development of aircraft approach
procedures for landing with the use of the GNSS system in air transport [7].
The aim of this investigation is to recover the possibility of aircraft coordinates using the
DGPS positioning method in air navigation. In the test research, we recovered the position of
a Cessna 172 aircraft by executing a test flight around the airfield in Dęblin. The position of
the aircraft was recovered using RTKLIB software in the RTPOST module. Satellite data
were used for the numeric calculations, which were obtained from a Topcon Hiper Pro
received mounted on board the Cessna 172 and installed as a physical reference station at the
military airfield in Dęblin. The calculations were made in the postprocessing mode for the
GPS code observations.

2. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The basic observation equations in the DGPS positioning method rely on the use of the
operation of double difference of GPS code observations, as follows [4,8]:
Application of the DGPS method for… 67.

 PAB ,1   AB  I AB ,1  TAB  M P1

ij ij ij ij


PAB ,2   AB  I AB ,2  TAB  M P 2
ij ij ij ij
(1)

where:
 is the operator of the double difference for code measurements, which allows for comparing
the difference in code measurements for two satellites tracked by two receivers
 is the operator of a single difference for code measurements, which allows for determining
the difference in code measurements for two satellites tracked by one receiver
r ur ur
AB is the vector in the space between the base station ( A ) and the rover receiver ( B )
mounted on board the aircraft
ij
PAB r
is the value of the double code difference (expressed in metres) on the vector AB
,1

between the satellites i and j on the L1 frequency in the GPS system

ij
PAB r
is the value of the double code difference (expressed in metres) on the vector AB
,2

between the satellites i and j on the L2 frequency in the GPS system

r
 AB
ij
is the geometric distance of the vector AB for the double code difference (expressed in
geocentric coordinates XYZ)
ij
I AB ,1 is the value of the ionosphere delay on the L1 frequency for the double code difference
ij
I AB ,2 is value of the ionosphere delay on the L2 frequency for the double code difference
ij
I AB    I AB
ij
,2 ,1 is the relationship of the ionosphere delay on the L1 and L2 frequency
2
 f1 
  
 f2 is the scaling coefficient
f1 is the L1 frequency in the GPS system
f 2 is the L2 frequency in the GPS system
ij
TAB is the value of the troposphere delay for the double code difference
M P1 is the multipath effect and noise measurement at the L1 frequency for the code
measurements
M P 2 is the multipath effect and noise measurement at L2 frequency for the code measurements

The observation equations (1) were recorded for the code observations P1/P2 for the
carrier frequencies L1/L2 in the GPS navigation system. In Equation (1), the unknown
parameters are the coordinates of the aircraft involved in the geometrical distance factor. The
parameters of the ionosphere and troposphere delays are expressed by deterministic models.
The values of the multipath effect are expressed on the basis of empirical models. The
observation model from Equation (1) is usually solved in two stages, using Kalman filtering;
see below [1]:

a) Process of “prediction”:
 x p  A0  x0

 Pp  A0  P0  A0  Qo
T
(2)
where:
68 K. Krasuski, J. Ćwiklak

A0 is the matrix of coefficients

x0 is the estimation of the values of the designated parameters a priori from the previous step
P0 is the estimation of the values of covariance a priori from the previous step
xp
is the prediction of the state value
Pp
refers to the predicted covariance values
Q0 is the variance matrix of the noise of the measurement process

b) Process of “correction”:
 K  P  H T   H  P  H T  R 1
 k p p

 xk  x p  K k   z  H  x p 

 Pk   I  K k  H   Pp
 (3)
where:
R is the covariance matrix of measurements
H is the matrix of partial derivatives
K k is the Kalman gain matrix
z is the vector of measured values
I is the unit matrix
xk refers to the parameters determined a posteriori
Pk is the covariance matrix of parameters determined a posteriori

The Kalman filtering process is performed sequentially for all measured epochs
registered by the GNSS receiver mounted on board the aircraft. Additionally, in the stochastic
process of developing the GPS observations, the accuracy of positioning the aircraft is also
determined. It should be emphasized that the designated coordinates of the aircraft and their
accuracies are expressed in the geocentric coordinates XYZ.

3. RESEARCH EXPERIMENT

The verification of applying the DGPS technique in air navigation was carried out in an
air experiment using a Cessna 172 aircraft. The air experiment was conducted on a military
airfield in Dęblin and in the surrounding area. The test flight on the Cessna 172 was made in
the morning, from 09:39:03 to 10:35:03, according to the time of the GPS navigation.
Figure 1 shows the trajectory of the Cessna 172 on the horizontal plane. The coordinates
of the aircraft were expressed using BLh ellipsoidal coordinates (B: latitude, L: longitude, h:
ellipsoidal height). In order to transform the coordinates of the aircraft from the XYZ
geocentric coordinate frame into the BLh ellipsoidal frame, the Helmert transformation was
used [15, 18]. Figure 1 shows the location of the reference station REF1, which was used to
recover the precise trajectory of the flight of the Cessna 172 in postprocessing. The base
station REF1 was mounted and installed on the roof of the Air Force Academy in Dęblin. The
basis of the technical infrastructure of the reference station REF1 was the dual-frequency
Topcon Hiper Pro receiver, which recorded code, phase and Doppler observations from the
Application of the DGPS method for… 69.

navigations systems (GPS and GLONASS). The frequency of registering GNSS satellite
observations on the memory card of the receiver equalled 1 s. The target reference coordinates
of the REF1 base station in the BLh ellipsoidal frame were as follows:
– Latitude: 51 33’ 19.92606” N
– Longitude: 21 52’ 08.72275” E
– Ellipsoidal height: 152.069 m

Fig. 1. The horizontal trajectory of the flight of the Cessna 172

During the flight test, the geodetic receiver Hiper Pro was installed on board the Cessna
172 (see Figure 2). The aim of the Topcon Hiper Pro rover receiver was to collect raw GNSS
observations in order to recover the coordinates of the aircraft in postprocessing. The
frequency of data registration in the rover receiver was also equal to 1 s. Furthermore, the
SAMSET system, which monitored the position of the aircraft in near real time, was installed
on board the Cessna 172.

Fig. 2. The GNSS receiver in the pilot’s cabin of the Cessna 172
70 K. Krasuski, J. Ćwiklak

The simultaneous synchronization of GNSS observations from the Topcon Hiper Pro
rover receiver and the receiver of the REF1reference station allowed for the designation of the
Cessna 172’s position, as well as the determination of the positioning accuracy.
The coordinates of the aircraft were designated on the basis of a single baseline (spatial vector
r
AB ), i.e., baseline (vector) REF1-Cessna 172. In order to recover the aircraft coordinate
system, the authors used P1/P2 code observations for the DGPS positioning method (see
Chapter 1). In order to determine the accurate coordinates of the aircraft and its precision, we
used RTKLIB software. For this purpose, we used the computational module
“DGPS/DGNSS”, stored in the RTKPOST library. For the sake of performing the
calculations, the “DGPS/DGNSS” module in RTKPOST library was configured as below
[17]:
 GNSS system: GPS system
 GNSS observations: code observations P1/P2 in the GPS system
 Construction of the observation equations: double difference for code observations in the
GPS system
 Data source of the ephemeris GPS satellites: GPS navigation data message
 Source of the GPS observation: RINEX 2.11 file
 Method for determining the coordinates of the GPS satellites: based on the parameters of
the Kepler orbit
 Correction of the pseudorange from the satellite to the receiver antenna: applied
 Effect of the earth’s rotation: applied
 Sagnac effect: applied
 Correction of the satellite clock: eliminated
 Relativistic effects: eliminated
 TGD hardware delay: eliminated
 Receiver hardware delay: eliminated
 Troposphere model: Saastamoinen
 Ionosphere correction model: Klobuchar
 Source of ionosphere correction: GPS navigation data message
 Receiver antenna phase centre: based on the ANTEX IGS08 file
 Elevation angle: 10°
 Observation weighting: applied
 A priori standard deviation of code observations: 1 m
 Initial values of aircraft coordinates: based on the RINEX file header
 Frame of coordinates: geocentric XYZ and ellipsoidal BLh (ultimately ETRF ‘89)
 Method of calculations: Kalman forward-filtering
 Positioning method: DGPS/DGNSS
 Positioning mode: kinematic
 Computational mode: postprocessing
 Interval of calculations: 1 s
 Blunder error detection in GPS measurements: RAIM module algorithm
 Number of iterations in the measurement epoch: five
 Maximum value of the DOP coefficient: 30
 Final recording of coordinates: coordinates in the XYZ geocentric frame and the BLh
ellipsoidal frame
 Correction of the receiver clock: eliminated
Application of the DGPS method for… 71.

 Geodynamic and tidal effects: applied

 Rover receiver: Topcon Hiper Pro mounted in a Cessna 172 aircraft
 Base receiver: Topcon Hiper Pro fixed at the REF1 reference station

4. RESEARCH RESULTS

The examination of the use of GNSS satellite technology in air navigation is focused on
determining four basic positioning parameters: availability, accuracy, continuity and integrity.
The availability parameter is determined based on the visibility of the GNSS constellation
during the measurement session. In addition, when tracking the GNSS satellite constellation,
no break must appear in the satellite positioning due to the lack of navigation data and
observation data. Therefore, monitoring the available satellites of a given constellation of the
GNSS system (e.g., the GPS system) is of crucial importance. In accordance with Annex 10
to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, entitled “Radio Communication”, Volume
I “Radio Navigation Aids”, a typical parameter value of the availability of the GPS system is
0.99 (99%) [9]. This means, de facto, that, during the executed air test, the continuity of
tracking a GPS constellation equals at least 0.99 of the duration of the whole flight. Thus, the
lack of data or GPS system failure may occur only in the case of 1% of the duration of the
flight test. Figure 3 shows the number of available GPS satellites during the executed test
flight in Dęblin on 1 June 2010.

Fig. 3. Number of satellites in the GPS constellation

Based on Figure 3, it can be concluded that the number of available GPS satellites during
the test flight ranged from five to nine. Therefore, when executing the test flight, the tracking
of the GPS constellation was still available. Likewise, navigation data were not missing.
Therefore, the availability parameter of the constellation of GPS satellites was above 0.99
(99%), which complies with the ICAO requirements. It should be added that the number of
available GPS satellites in Figure 3 de facto expresses the total number of GPS satellites
tracked jointly by the rover receiver mounted on board the Cessna 172 and the REF1
reference station.
72 K. Krasuski, J. Ćwiklak

An important parameter in determining the quality of satellite positioning is the accuracy

of the set position. The accuracy parameter in the GNSS measurements is represented by the
values of the standard deviation for the designated coordinates of the aircraft. In this case, the
accuracy of the set position of the Cessna 172 aircraft can be referred to geocentric XYZ
coordinates, as below:
mX  Pk (1,1); mY  Pk (2, 2); mZ  Pk (3,3)
(4)

where:
mX is the accuracy of the aircraft position along the X-axis
mY is the accuracy of the aircraft position along the Y-axis
mZ is the accuracy of the aircraft position along the Z-axis

or adequately expressed in the coordinates of the ellipsoidal BLh, as follows [13]:

mB  m BLh (1,1); mL  m BLh (2, 2); mh  m BLh (3,3)

(5)
where:
mBLh is the covariance matrix in the geodetic frame (BLh), mBLh =R  Pk  R
T

R is the transition matrix from the geocentric (XYZ) to the geodetic frame (BLh)
mB is the standard deviation in latitude
mL is the standard deviation in longitude
mh is the standard deviation in ellipsoidal height

Fig. 4. The accuracy of the Cessna 172 aircraft in the XYZ geocentric frame

Figure 4 shows the values of positioning accuracy of the Cessna 172 in the XYZ
geocentric frame; see Equation (4). The average positioning accuracy along the X-axis is
0.826 m and the median value is equal to 0.874 m. Furthermore, the dispersion of the obtained
results of the parameter mX ranges from 0.630 m to 1.018 m. It should be noted that, for
approximately 96% of the results, the parameter mX is less than 1 m. The average positioning
accuracy along the Y-axis is 0.466 m and the median value is equal to 0.458 m. Moreover, the
Application of the DGPS method for… 73.

dispersion of the obtained results of the parameter mY ranges from 0.436 m to 0.619 m. It is
worth stressing that, for 100% of the results, the mY parameter is less than 0.7 m. In addition,
for approximately 82% of the results, the mY parameter is included in the range from 0 m to
0.5 m. The average positioning accuracy along the Z-axis equals 1.229 m and the median
value is equal to 1.251 m. Furthermore, the dispersion of the obtained results of the mZ term
is included in the range from 1.113 m to 1.634 m. For approximately 82% of the results,
the mZ term is in the range from 0 m to 1.3 m. On the other hand, for about 100% of the
results, the mZ parameter is included in the range from 0 m to 1.7 m.
Figure 5 shows the values of positioning accuracy in the BLh ellipsoidal frame; see
Equation (5). The average positioning accuracy of geodetic latitude B is equal to 0.905 m and
the median value equals 0.917 m. Furthermore, the dispersion of the obtained results of the
parameter mB ranges from 0.768 m to 1.119 m. It should be noted that, for approximately
77% of the results, the parameter mB is less than 1 m. The average positioning accuracy of
geodetic longitude L is 0.553 m and the median value is equal to 0.544 m. Moreover, the
dispersion of the obtained results of the parameter mL ranges from 0.483 m to 0.681 m. It is
worth stressing that, for approximately 72% of the results, the mL parameter is less than 0.6
m. Furthermore, for 100% of the results, the parameter mL is the range from 0 m to 0.7 m.
The average positioning accuracy of ellipsoidal height h equals 1.135 m, whereas the median
value is approximately equal to 1.118 m. Besides, the dispersion of the obtained results of the
parameter mh ranges from 1.027 m to 1.546 m. For approximately 92% of the results, the
parameter mh is included in the range from 0 m to 1.3 m. On the other hand, about 100% of
the results of the parameter mh is included in the range from 0 m to 1.6 m.

Fig. 5. The accuracy of the Cessna 172 aircraft in the BLh geodetic frame

Annex 10 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, entitled “Air

Communication”, Volume I “Radio Navigation Aids”, specifies the technical standards for
the parameter of accuracy of satellite positioning using the GPS navigation system in civil
aviation [9]. The ICAO imposed the framework for commissioning the GPS system on
civilian users in aviation. The ICAO’s accuracy standards are matched with air operations for
a specific flight plane of an aircraft in civil aviation. For navigation on the horizontal plane,
the accuracy of flight navigation LNAV ranges from 9 m to 17 m with a confidence level of
95%. For navigation on the vertical horizontal plane, the accuracy of flight navigation VNAV
74 K. Krasuski, J. Ćwiklak

ranges from 15 m to 37 m with a confidence level of 95%. On the basis of the conducted
investigation and obtained results with regard to the positioning accuracy of the Cessna 172, it
can be concluded that the boundary limitations of the ICAO technical standards were met.
The lowest values of accuracy for the horizontal coordinates B and L are 1.2 and 0.7 m,
respectively, which do not exceed the boundary accuracy for the ICAO’s technical standards.
On the other hand, the lowest accuracy for the ellipsoidal height is 1.6 m, which does not
exceed the accuracy limit in the ICAO’s technical standards for navigation on the vertical
plane, either.
Figure 6 shows the positioning accuracy of the Cessna 172 in three-dimensional (3D)
space. The position error of the aircraft in 3D space is defined using the MRSE parameter.
The mathematical formula defining the MRSE parameter is as follows [16]:

MRSE  mB 2  mL2  mh2 (6)

The average value of the MRSE parameter is 1.555 m and the statistical value of the
median equals 1.601. The dispersion of the obtained MRSE parameter values ranges from
1.372 m to 1.955 m. It is worth noting that, for approximately 43% of the results, the MRSE
parameter is less than 1.3 m, while, for approximately 84% of the results, the MRSE
parameter is in the range from 0 m to 1.4 m. Besides, for approximately 100% of the results,
the MRSE parameter achieves an accuracy of up to 2 m.

Fig. 6. The values of the MRSE parameter

Application of the DGPS method for… 75.

\
Fig. 7. The values of the HPL/VPL parameters
The parameter of integrity for the DGPS satellite positioning in civil aviation is of the
utmost importance during the execution of air operations in airspace. In civil aviation, the
integrity parameter is specified by means of safety levels. In practice, the levels of safety are
referenced to navigation on both the horizontal and the vertical planes. On the horizontal
plane, the safety level is determined by the HPL parameter, and by means of the VPL
parameter on the vertical plane. The approximate values of the HPL and VPL safety
parameters are determined on the basis of Equation (7) [10]:

 HPL  k  mB 2  mL2
 HPL

 VPL  kVPL  mh (7)

where:
k HPL  6 for the horizontal plane
kVPL  5.33 for the vertical plane [5]

Figure 7 shows the obtained values for the HPL and VPL parameters. The average value
of the HPL parameter is 5.697 m and the median value is equal to 5.912 m. In addition, the
dispersion of the obtained results of the HPL parameter ranges between 4.599 m and nearly
6.861 m. It should be noted that the values of the HPL parameter for the entire duration of the
research experiment have an upward tendency. The average value of the VPL parameter is
6.553 m and the statistical value of the median is equal to 6.669 m. Moreover, the dispersion
of the obtained results of the VPL parameter ranges from 5.934 m to almost 8.711 m.
Annex 10 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, entitled “Air
Communication”, Volume I “Radio Navigation Aids”, specifies the technical standards for
the parameter of integrity for satellite positioning using the GNSS navigation system in civil
aviation [9]. The integrity values for GNSS satellite positioning in civil aviation were
specified for the selected type of aircraft approach for landing. Within the framework of the
ICAO’s technical standards, there are three types of aircraft approach to landing with the
GNSS sensor:
76 K. Krasuski, J. Ćwiklak

– Non-precision approach (NPA)

– Approach procedures with vertical guidance (APV)
- Precision approach (PA)

In Poland, the largest civilian passenger and transport airports have implemented
technical regulations for the NPA with the GNSS sensor. The framework for the operation
and application of the GNSS sensor for this approach was introduced by the Polish Air
Navigation Services Agency. It must be underlined that, with regard to the NPA, the accuracy
of determining the position of the aircraft on the horizontal plane is equal to 220 m. In
addition, the integrity of GNSS satellite positioning is 556 m for the horizontal plane. The
NPA with the GNSS sensor does not take into account the technical standards for conducting
navigation on the vertical plane [5].
The obtained values of the HPL and VPL parameters can be used directly or indirectly to
determine the continuity of GNSS satellite positioning in civil aviation. The parameter of
continuity specifies and defines the gaps in tracking down a moving object with the use of
GNSS satellite techniques. Furthermore, the parameter of continuity indicates possible failure
and a lack of data from the GNSS positioning system. The mathematical formula to determine
the parameter of continuity is as follows [11]:
 HPL  HAL

 VPL  VAL (8)
where:
HAL is the maximum alert value on the horizontal plane
VAL is the maximum alert value on the vertical plane

The parameter values of HAL and VAL specify the maximum alert levels for the
integrity of GNSS positioning during the selected type of aircraft approach for landing. The
continuity parameter is exceeded when the HPL is larger than HAL, or when VPL is larger
than VAL. Within the framework of the NPA using GNSS, the HAL value is 556 m, whereas
the VAL value is unspecified. Therefore, the HPL value does not exceed the HAL limit for
navigation on the horizontal plane for research data from the flight test. Consequently, the
continuity of the GNSS navigation solution on the horizontal plane is preserved and
maintained. On the other hand, the continuity of GNSS positioning on the vertical plane for
the NPA approach cannot be compared.

5. DISCUSSION

In this section, the obtained trajectory of an aircraft from a DGPS application was
verified and compared with results from the DGLONASS solution. The aircraft position was
estimated using the DGLONASS method in the RTKPOST library within the RTKLIB
software package. The Kalman filter solution was applied as a stochastic scheme of
designation for the aircraft coordinates in the RTKLIB program. The coordinates of the
aircraft were recovered with an interval of 1 s using the DGLONASS method. The aircraft
coordinates from the DGLONASS solution are referenced to the ETRF’89 frame, similar to
the DGPS method.
Application of the DGPS method for… 77.

Fig. 8. The difference in the XYZ geocentric coordinates of the aircraft between the DGPS
and DGLONASS solutions

The difference in the aircraft coordinates in the geocentric XYZ frame between the DGPS
and DGLONASS solutions was calculated as follows:
rx  xDGPS  xDGLO
ry  yDGPS  yDGLO
rz  zDGPS  zDGLO (9)

where:
x DGPS is the x coordinate of the aircraft based on the DGPS solution – see Equation (1)
xDGLO is the x coordinate of the aircraft based on the DGLONASS solution
yDGPS is the y coordinate of the aircraft based on the DGPS solution – see Equation (1)
yDGLO is the y coordinate of the aircraft based on the DGLONASS solution
z DGPS is the z coordinate of the aircraft based on the DGPS solution – see Equation (1)
zDGLO is the z coordinate of the aircraft based on the DGLONASS solution

Figure 8 presents the values of the (rx, ry, rz ) coordinates based on a comparison of the
DGPS and DGLONASS solutions. The mean difference for the x coordinate of the aircraft
equals -0.941 m and the root mean square (RMS) bias [14] equals 0.821 m. In addition, the
dispersion of results for parameter rx is between -5.805 m and +1.688 m. The mean
difference for the y coordinate of the aircraft equals -0.435 m, with an RMS bias of about
0.457 m. Moreover, the dispersion of results for the ry parameter is between -6.149 m and
+1.517 m. The mean difference for the coordinate from the aircraft equals -1.041 m and the
RMS bias is about 0.733 m. In addition, the dispersion of results for the rz term is between -
9.894 m and +2.110 m.

6. CONCLUSIONS
78 K. Krasuski, J. Ćwiklak

This article analysed the applicability of the DGPS positioning method in determining
aircraft coordinates in air navigation. To this end, we recovered the position of a Cessna 172
aircraft in postprocessing. The calculations were carried out using RTKLIB software in the
RTKPOST module by exploiting GPS code observations. The mathematical model for
designating the aircraft position was based on the use of observation equations for dual code
differences. In the research experiment, we used the P1/P2 code observations recorded by the
geodetic receivers mounted on board the Cessna 172 and the Topcon Hiper Pro receiver
installed at the reference station REF1. The materials for research came from a test flight,
which was conducted at the military airfield in Dęblin. Within the framework of the
conducted research, we recovered the trajectory of the Cessna 172 using the Kalman forward-
filtering forward base solution. The article also analysed the GNSS satellite positioning for
determining the parameters of availability, accuracy, integrity and continuity in civil aviation.
The parameter of availability of the GPS satellite constellation was 100%, which facilitated a
continuous navigation solution for the position of the Cessna 172 aircraft. The accuracy of the
designated coordinates of the Cessna 172 was higher than 1.7 m in the XYZ geocentric frame
and higher than 1.6 m in the ellipsoidal BLh frame. Furthermore, we set the MRSE parameter,
whose accuracy was higher than 2 m. The integrity of GNSS satellite positioning in civil
aviation was defined by the HPL and VPL parameters. The values of the HPL parameter did
not exceed 7 m, and 9 m with regard to the VPL parameter. The continuity of GNSS satellite
positioning was maintained, with no failure on the part of the navigation solution for the
position of the Cessna 172. It should be added that the HPL values did not exceed the border
limits of HAL positioning for air operations on the horizontal plane. In the external control,
the geocentric coordinates (x, y, z) of the aircraft were compared with the results of the
DGLONASS technique. On the basis of the comparison between the DGPS and DGLONASS
solutions, it was found that the values of RMS bias for the (x, y, z) aircraft coordinates were
less than 1 m.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Tomoji Takasu for making available the RTKLIB
software package on the website www.rtklib.com.

References

1. Ali A.S.A. 2013. Low-cost Sensors-based Attitude Estimation for Pedestrian Navigation
in GPS-denied Environments. PhD thesis. UCGE Reports Number 20387: 43-46.
University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
2. Ali Q., S. Montenegro. 2014. “A Matlab implementation of differential GPS for low-
cost GPS receivers”. TransNav 8(3): 343-350. DOI: 10.12716/1001.08.03.03.
3. Bakuła Mieczysław. 2010. “Network code DGPS positioning and reliable estimation of
position accuracy”. Survey Review 42(315): 82-91. DOI:
10.1179/003962610X12572516251448.
4. Bosy Jarosław. 2005. “Precise processing of satellite GPS observations in local
networks located in mountain areas”. Zeszyty Naukowe Akademii Rolniczej we
Wroclawiu 522: 13-16.
Application of the DGPS method for… 79.

5. Grunwald Grzegorz, Adam Ciećko, Mieczysław Bakuła, Rafał Kaźmierczak. 2016.

“Examination of GPS/EGNOS integrity in north-eastern Poland”. IET Radar, Sonar &
Navigation 10(1): 114-121. DOI: 10.1049/iet-rsn.2015.0053.
6. Grzegorzewski Marek, Waldemar Jaruszewski, Andrzej Fellner, Stanisław Oszczak,
Aleksander Wasilewski, Zofia Rzepecka, Jacek Kapcia, Tadeusz Popławski. 1999.
“Preliminary results of DGPS/DGLONASS aircraft positioning in flight approaches and
landings”. Annual of Navigation 1: 41-53.
7. Grzegorzewski Marek. 2005. “Navigating an aircraft by means of a position potential in
three-dimensional space”. Annual of Navigation 9: 1-111.
8. Hofmann-Wellenhof Bernhard, Herbert Lichtenegger, Elmar Wasle. 2008. GNSS –
Global Navigation Satellite Systems: GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, and More. Vienna and
New York: SpringerWienNewYork. ISBN 978-3-211-73012-6.
9. International Civil Aviation Organization. 2006. ICAO Standards and Recommended
Practices (SARPS), Annex 10, Volume I (Radio Navigation Aids). Available at:
http://www.ulc.gov.pl/pl/prawo/prawo-mi%C4%99dzynarodowe/206-konwencje.
10. Jokinen Altti, Shaojun Feng, Carl Milner, Wolfgang Schuster, Washington Ochieng,
Chris Hide, Terry Moore, Chris Hill. 2011. “Precise point positioning and integrity
monitoring with GPS and GLONASS”. Paper presented at the European Navigation
Conference 2011, London, UK.
11. Kaplan Elliott, Hegarty, Christopher. 2017. Understanding GPS/GNSS Principles and
Applications. Norwood, MA: Artech House. ISBN-13: 978-1-63081-058-0.
12. Kaźmierczak Rafał., Grunwald Grunwald., Bakuła Mieczysław. 2011. “The use of
RTCM 2.X DEKODER software for analyses of KODGIS and NAWGIS services of the
ASG-EUPOS system”. Technical Sciences 14(2): 229-243.
13. Osada Edward. 2001. Geodesy, Wrocław: Oficyna Wydawnicza Politechniki
Wrocławskiej. ISBN 83-7085-663-2.
14. Przestrzelski Paweł, Bakuła Mieczysław, Galas Roman. 2017. “The integrated use of
GPS/GLONASS observations in network code differential positioning”. GPS Solutions
21(2): 627-638. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-016-0552-y.
15. Sanz Subirana Jaume, Jose Miguel Juan Zornoza, Manuel Hernández-Pajares. 2013.
GNSS Data Processing, Volume I: Fundamentals and Algorithms. Noordwijk,
Netherlands: ESA Communications, ESTEC. ISBN 978-92-9221-886-7.
16. Seeber Gűnter. 2003. Satellite Geodesy. 10785 Berlin, Germany: Walter de Gruyter
GmbH & Co. KG. ISBN 3-11-017549-5.
17. Takasu Tomoji. 2013. RTKLIB Ver. 2.4.2 Manual, RTKLIB: An Open Source Program
Package for GNSS Positioning. Available at:
http://www.rtklib.com/prog/manual_2.4.2.pdf.

Received 07.12.2017; accepted in revised form 25.02.2018

Scientific Journal of Silesian University of Technology. Series Transport is licensed under

a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License