© 2015, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. The characterization of the accuracy of ionospheric models currently used in global navigation satellite systems (GNSSs) is a long-standing issue. The characterization remains a challenging problem owing to the lack of sufficiently accurate slant ionospheric determinations to be used as a reference. The present study proposes a methodology based on the comparison of the predictions of any ionospheric model with actual unambiguous carrier-phase measurements from a global distribution of permanent receivers. The differences are separated as hardware delays (a receiver constant plus a satellite constant) per day. The present study was conducted for the entire year of 2014, i.e. during the last solar cycle maximum. The ionospheric models assessed are the operational models broadcast by the global positioning system (GPS) and Galileo constellations, the satellite-based augmentation system (SBAS) (i.e. European Geostationary Navigation Overlay System (EGNOS) and wide area augmentation system (WAAS)), a number of post-process global ionospheric maps (GIMs) from different International GNSS Service (IGS) analysis centres (ACs) and, finally, a more sophisticated GIM computed by the research group of Astronomy and GEomatics (gAGE). Ionospheric models based on GNSS data and represented on a grid (IGS GIMs or SBAS) correct about 85 % of the total slant ionospheric delay, whereas the models broadcasted in the navigation messages of GPS and Galileo only account for about 70 %. Our gAGE GIM is shown to correct 95 % of the delay. The proposed methodology appears to be a useful tool to improve current ionospheric models.Postprint (author's final draft

This work reviews an ionospheric activity indicator useful for identifying disturbed periods affecting the performance of Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS). This index is based in the Along Arc TEC Rate (AATR) and can be easily computed from dual-frequency GNSS measurements. The AATR indicator has been assessed over more than one Solar Cycle (2002–2017) involving about 140 receivers distributed world-wide. Results show that it is well correlated with the ionospheric activity and, unlike other global indicators linked to the geomagnetic activity (i.e. DST or Ap), it is sensitive to the regional behaviour of the ionosphere and identifies specific effects on GNSS users. Moreover, from a devoted analysis of different Satellite Based Augmentation System (SBAS) performances in different ionospheric conditions, it follows that the AATR indicator is a very suitable mean to reveal whether SBAS service availability anomalies are linked to the ionosphere. On this account, the AATR indicator has been selected as the metric to characterise the ionosphere operational conditions in the frame of the European Space Agency activities on the European Geostationary Navigation Overlay System (EGNOS). The AATR index has been adopted as a standard tool by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) for joint ionospheric studies in SBAS. In this work we explain how the AATR is computed, paying special attention to the cycle-slip detection, which is one of the key issues in the AATR computation, not fully addressed in other indicators such as the Rate Of change of the TEC Index (ROTI). After this explanation we present some of the main conclusions about the ionospheric activity that can extracted from the AATR values during the above mentioned long-term study. These conclusions are: (a) the different spatial correlation related with the MOdified DIP (MODIP) which allows to clearly separate high, mid and low latitude regions, (b) the large spatial correlation in mid latitude regions which allows to define a planetary index, similar to the geomagnetic ones, (c) the seasonal dependency which is related with the longitude and (d) the variation of the AATR value at different time scales (hourly, daily, seasonal, among others) which confirms most of the well-known time dependences of the ionospheric events, and finally, (e) the relationship with the space weather events.

Single-frequency users of the global navigation satellite system (GNSS) must correct for the ionospheric delay. These corrections are available from global ionospheric models (GIMs). Therefore, the accuracy of the GIM is important because the unmodeled or incorrectly part of ionospheric delay contributes to the positioning error of GNSS-based positioning. However, the positioning error of receivers located at known coordinates can be used to infer the accuracy of GIMs in a simple manner. This is why assessment of GIMs by means of the position domain is often used as an alternative to assessments in the ionospheric delay domain. The latter method requires accurate reference ionospheric values obtained from a network solution and complex geodetic modeling. However, evaluations using the positioning error method present several difficulties, as evidenced in recent works, that can lead to inconsistent results compared to the tests using the ionospheric delay domain. We analyze the reasons why such inconsistencies occur, applying both methodologies. We have computed the position of 34 permanent stations for the entire year of 2014 within the last Solar Maximum. The positioning tests have been done using code pseudoranges and carrier-phase leveled (CCL) measurements. We identify the error sources that make it difficult to distinguish the part of the positioning error that is attributable to the ionospheric correction: the measurement noise, pseudorange multipath, evaluation metric, and outliers. Once these error sources are considered, we obtain equivalent results to those found in the ionospheric delay domain assessments. Accurate GIMs can provide single-frequency navigation positioning at the decimeter level using CCL measurements and better positions than those obtained using the dual-frequency ionospheric-free combination of pseudoranges. Finally, some recommendations are provided for further studies of ionospheric models using the position domain method.

No abstract

The present contribution evaluates how the European Geostationary Navigation Overlay System (EGNOS) meets the International Maritime Organization (IMO) requirements established in its Resolution A.1046 for navigation in harbor entrances, harbor approaches, and coastal waters: 99.8% of signal availability, 99.8% of service availability, 99.97% of service continuity and 10 m of horizontal accuracy. The data campaign comprises two years of data, from 1 May 2016 to 30 April 2018 (i.e., 730 days), involving 108 permanent stations located within 20 km of the coast or in islands across the EGNOS coverage area, EGNOS corrections, and cleansed GPS broadcast navigation data files. We used the GNSS Laboratory Tool Suite (gLAB) to compute the reference coordinates of the stations, the EGNOS solution, as well as the EGNOS service maps. Our results show a signal availability of 99.999%, a horizontal accuracy of 0.91 m at the 95th percentile, and the regions where the IMO requirements on service availability and service continuity are met. In light of the results presented in the paper, the authors suggest the revision of the assumptions made in the EGNOS Maritime Service against those made in EGNOS for civil aviation; in particular, the use of the EGNOS Message Type 10.