ODREA Demonstration Report

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "ODREA Demonstration Report"

Transcription

1 Document information Project Title ODREA Project Number RPAS.06 Project Manager Rockwell Collins France Deliverable Name Edition Task contributors Abstract This document constitutes the Operational Demonstrations of RPAS in European Airspace (ODREA) project Demonstration Report. It provides an overview of the project, and describes in details how the demonstration exercises were conducted and what results were obtained. It also provides a list of the dissemination activities undertaken as defined in the ODREA Demonstration Plan [1].

2 Authoring & Approval Prepared By - Authors of the document. Name & Company Position & Title Date Eric THOMAS / Rockwell Collins France ODREA Project Coordinator 07/04/2015 Reviewed By Reviewers internal to the project. Name & Company Position & Title Date Willy DEPOIX / Sagem ODREA Project Member 18/05/2015 David SZYMANSKI / ENAC ODREA Project Member 19/05/2015 Xavier PARIS / ENAC ODREA Project Member 19/05/2015 Reviewed By - Other SESAR projects, Airspace Users, staff association, military, Industrial Support, other organisations. Name & Company Position & Title Date Approved for submission to the SJU By - Representatives of the company involved in the project. Name & Company Position & Title Date Lucile CANOURGUES / RCF ODREA Quality Manager 10/07/2015 Julien FARJON / Sagem WP100 & WP300 Leader 10/07/2015 René ZANNI / DSNA WP200 Leader 10/07/2015 Catherine RONFLE-NADAUD / ENAC WP400 Leader 10/07/2015 Rejected By - Representatives of the company involved in the project. Name & Company Position & Title Date Rational for rejection None. Document History Edition Date Status Author Justification /04/2015 Draft E. THOMAS New Document /05/2015 Draft E. THOMAS First draft for internal review /05/2015 Draft E. THOMAS 2nd draft for internal review /05/2015 Draft E. THOMAS Draft incl. internal comments /07/2015 Release E. THOMAS /07/2015 Release E. THOMAS Release after SJU s assessment Release without change track 2 of 74

3 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS... 3 LIST OF TABLES... 5 LIST OF FIGURES... 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION GLOSSARY OF TERMS ACRONYMS AND TERMINOLOGY CONTEXT OF THE DEMONSTRATIONS SCOPE OF THE DEMONSTRATION AND COMPLEMENTARITY WITH THE SESAR PROGRAMME Geographical Coverage Tailored Trajectories C2 Link Loss Procedure Demonstration Exercises Demonstration Exercises List Demonstration Exercises Schedule PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT ORGANISATION WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE DELIVERABLES RISK MANAGEMENT CONDUCT OF DEMONSTRATION EXERCISES EXERCISES PREPARATION Preparation of the Fast Time Simulations Preparation of the Real Time Simulations Preparation of the Flight Demonstrations EXERCISES EXECUTION DEVIATIONS FROM THE PLANNED ACTIVITIES EXERCISES RESULTS SUMMARY OF EXERCISES RESULTS CHOICE OF METRICS AND INDICATORS SUMMARY OF ASSUMPTIONS Results per KPA Impact on Safety, Capacity and Human Factors Description of assessment methodology Results impacting regulation and standardisation initiatives ANALYSIS OF EXERCISES RESULTS Unexpected Behaviours/Results CONFIDENCE IN RESULTS OF DEMONSTRATION EXERCISES Quality of Demonstration Exercises Results Significance of Demonstration Exercises Results Conclusions and recommendations DEMONSTRATION EXERCISES REPORTS DEMONSTRATION EXERCISE EXE-RPAS FAST TIME SIMULATIONS REPORT Exercise Scope Conduct of Demonstration Exercise Exercise Results Conclusions and recommendations of 74

4 6.2 DEMONSTRATION EXERCISE EXE-RPAS REAL TIME SIMULATIONS REPORT Exercise Scope Conduct of Demonstration Exercise Exercise Results Conclusions and recommendations DEMONSTRATION EXERCISE EXE-RPAS FLIGHT DEMONSTRATIONS REPORT Exercise Scope Conduct of Demonstration Exercise Exercise Results Conclusions and recommendations SUMMARY OF THE COMMUNICATION ACTIVITIES PLANNED ACTIVITIES ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES NEXT STEPS REFERENCES APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS REFERENCE DOCUMENTS APPENDIX A TAILORED TRAJECTORIES CHARTS APPENDIX B QUESTIONNAIRE TO CONTROLLERS APPENDIX C OVERALL PROTECTION AND TAILORED TRAJECTORIES APPENDIX D FINAL EVENT ROUND TABLE DEBRIEF of 74

5 List of tables Table 1: Demonstration Objectives Table 2: Demonstration Scenarios Table 3: EXE-RPAS Overview Table 4: EXE-RPAS Overview Table 5: EXE-RPAS Overview Table 6: Coverage of Demonstration Objectives by Demonstration Exercises Matrix Table 7: Partners Roles and Expectations Table 8: Risks List Table 9: Exercises Execution/Analysis Dates Table 10: Summary of Demonstration Exercises Results Table 11: Summary of Metrics and Indicators Table 12: Summary of Results per KPA Table 13: EXE-RPAS Fast Time Simulations Results Summary Table 14: EXE-RPAS Real Time Simulations Registration Planning Table 15: EXE-RPAS Real Time Simulations - Statistical Results Summary Table 16: EXE-RPAS Real Time Simulations - Questionnaire Results Summary Table 17: EXE-RPAS Demonstration Flights - Safety Study Risk Mitigation Table 18: EXE-RPAS Demonstration Flights - Sorties Results Summary Table 19: EXE-RPAS Demonstration Flights - Questionnaire Results Summary Table 20: EXE-RPAS Demonstration Flights Sorties Traffic Conditions (extract) Table 21: Communication Activities Planned Activities Table 22: Communication Activities Additional Activities List of figures Figure 1: Demonstration Exercises Geographical Coverage Figure 2: Tailored Trajectories - Approach RWY32L and RWY14R at LFBO Figure 3: Approach RWY32L at LFBO: RPA (green) vs. Airliner (magenta) Figure 4: Demonstration Exercises Schedule Figure 5: Work Packages Organisation Figure 6: EXE-RPAS Fast Time Simulations Overall Setup Figure 7: EXE-RPAS Real Time Simulations Overall Setup Figure 8: EXE-RPAS Real Time Simulations ATCo Position Setup Figure 9: EXE-RPAS Real Time Simulations Pseudo-Pilots Setup Figure 10: EXE-RPAS Real Time Simulations ATCo Briefing of C2 Link Loss Procedure Figure 11: EXE-RPAS Real Time Simulations Reference Scenario Inbound (blue) and Outbound (red) Traffic Flows Figure 12: EXE-RPAS Demonstration Flights - Sagem's Patroller TM (RPA) Figure 13: EXE-RPAS Demonstration Flights - Sagem's Patroller TM (RPS) Figure 14: EXE-RPAS Demonstration Flights D&A Demonstrator (pod) Figure 15: EXE-RPAS Demonstration Flights Overall Protection and Tailored Trajectories 54 Figure 16: EXE-RPAS Demonstration Flights - AIP SUP for the Creation of a TRA at Bédeille Figure 17: EXE-RPAS Demonstration Flights NOTAM for the Activation of a TRA at Bédeille Figure 18: EXE-RPAS Demonstration Flights D&A Avoidance Manoeuvres Figure 19: Tailored Trajectories Charts - POGO between LFBR and LFBO Figure 20: Tailored Trajectories Charts Approach RWY30 at LFBR Figure 21: Overall Protection and Tailored Trajectories Original Drawing of 74

6 Executive summary Kicked-off mid-october 2013 for a 20-month duration, the Operational Demonstration of RPAS in European Airspace (ODREA) project was undertaken by a consortium comprising Rockwell Collins France, Sagem, DSNA and ENAC. The project was one of the nine projects co-funded by the SESAR Joint Undertaking in the frame of RPAS Demonstration Projects activities. The overall objective of the ODREA project was to demonstrate integration of a large RPA (Sagem s Patroller ) into the managed traffic of a middle size commercial airport, Toulouse-Blagnac (LFBO). Moreover, RPAS specific non-nominal situations such as Detect and Avoid (D&A) as well as Command and Control (C2) link loss were addressed. In preparation of the demonstration activities, the project team designed tailored trajectories, taking benefit from the Patroller s flight performance (80 kt max speed, up to 9 approach slope) still complying with the regional ATM constraints. These trajectories allowed the RPA to depart from a smaller general aviation airfield, Muret-Lherm (LFBR), be integrated in the commercial traffic, and transit back to LFBR, where it finally performed approach and landing. As well, the team defined a Temporary Restricted Area (TRA) south of LFBO, which was used to safely perform the D&A exercises when activated by NOTAM. The design of the TRA was one of the many activities undertaken in order to satisfy the safety assessment and get approval for the flight demonstration exercises from the civil aviation authorities (DSAC). Started Feb-2014, the safety assessment was completed Sept-2014, during which meetings, conference calls and iterations on the document represented a total effort of approximately 120 person.hours. Other activities included publishing an AIP-SUP for the TRA, publishing NOTAMS, and putting together briefing material for the controllers as well as sending an information letter to airfields and aeroclubs surrounding LFBR. The tailored trajectories were first validated through real time simulations (EXE-RPAS.06-02). These involved 21 controllers and a realistic ATCo position in Toulouse-Blagnac, as well as remote pilots and the actual remote pilot station in Pontoise, more than 800 km away. The 45 minutes long scenarios were built around records of actual traffic in the Toulouse-Blagnac area. They included up to 4 RPAs flying simultaneously, one of which performed the pre-programmed C2 link loss procedure in a series of simulations. The analysis of the data and voice communications records logged during EXE-RPAS (typically trajectories flown), as well as of the questionnaires filled by the controllers after each simulation indicated that it seems technically and operationally feasible to insert safely RPA on the approach of a middle-size commercial aerodrome when commercial traffic distribution permits. No separation infringements were observed during the simulations, and 90% of the controllers felt the situation (approach sequence) safe. The slow flying RPA can be handled as a light manned aircraft provided reactivity and aeronautical phraseology fluency by the remote pilot. Some issues with the use of standard terminology were reported by the controllers that did not impact the exercise, but resulted in a change of remote pilot during the demonstration flights (EXE-RPAS.06-03). The demonstration flights (EXE-RPAS.06-03) were performed using Sagem s Patroller remotely piloted from LFBR, automatically or under the remote pilot s command. Only landings at LFBR were performed manually by the safety pilot on board the Patroller. EXE-RPAS consisted in one 2- week campaign in the area of Toulouse-Blagnac, during which more than 10 integrations in the traffic at LFBO were performed, validating the tailored trajectories in real conditions. Moreover, 5 D&A exercises took place in the TRA, using Sagem s D&A demonstrator and ENAC s plastron aircraft (BE- 58 or TB-20) during which automatic avoidance manoeuvres were initiated 700m away from the intruder in slow beam scenarios, and 1.2 km away in head on scenarios. The analysis of the data logged during EXE-RPAS (typically trajectories flown and D&A records), as well as of the questionnaires filled by the controllers after each integration exercise confirmed Industry-ANSP collaboration is key to the success of such a demonstration project. In order to better assess the performance of Sagem s D&A demonstrator, fast time simulations (EXE- RPAS.06-01) were performed by DSNA after embedding the actual D&A software into their EASY simulation suite. Over 800,000 fast time runs were performed, representing more than 2,200 days of simulations if real time. They covered different conflict geometries (97,200) between the RPA and 6 of 74

7 representative controlled traffic on the one hand, and different D&A and TCAS equipage combinations (4) on the other hand. The analysis of the data logged during EXE-RPAS (basically trajectories flown), confirms the positive benefits of the D&A function on safety (factor 10 improvement for the probability of collision when D&A is coordinated with TCAS, a probability of collision avoidance of for D&A Only though the D&A algorithm did not trigger properly in some situations. More technical investigation work is needed and the algorithms should be more extensively validated through simulations involving different traffic categories and have their design refined from feedback from the simulations. As a recommendation for future RPAS integration in non-segregated airspace project, it can be highlighted that there is a need for both: Continuing the exercises (maturation of D&A in view for standardization, Controller-Remote Pilot communication, RPAS degraded modes as well as landing and taxiing phases) in order to go further with the results and, Undertaking further studies addressing C3 developments, design of tailored trajectories including the definition of standard protection criteria for RPA as well as minimum requirements for routine IFR flights. Also, ODREA would recommend that the results provided by Demonstration Projects be synthetized by the SJU for similarities or differences, and the assessment be handed to SESAR 2020 and EUROCAE. There are no intellectual property issues as the results are made available publicly through the Final Reports. 7 of 74

8 1 Introduction The ODREA project was expected to investigate different aspects of RPAS insertion in civilian airspaces, including: Definition and validation of procedures in aerodrome circulations (taxi, departure, arrival ) Capability to integrate a large RPA into the managed traffic of a middle sized commercial airport, and have it follow adapted departure / arrival procedures from / to that airport Capability to conduct missions in lower airspace in nominal but also in abnormal situations (e.g. detect and avoid (D&A), Command & Control (C2) link loss) For that purpose, the project merged simulation and flight demonstration activities: Simulations: their main objectives were to assist in the definition and the validation of operational procedures managing RPAS within representative controlled traffic. Moreover, the simulation framework was used to perform deeper analysis of some situations and environments without over cost that would have resulted from actual flights though allowing assessment of human factors thanks to representative controller and remote pilot stations Demonstration Flights: their main objectives were twofold: 1. Demonstrate that RPAS can be interfaced with standard civil Air Traffic Control (ATC) and exchange data to be managed as other commercial aircraft by a civil operator 2. Demonstrate Detect & Avoid capabilities with respect to other traffic, both on the airport surface and in the air Several demonstration flights were performed in order to: Assess the impact of RPAS architecture on communication between ATC and RPAS operators, particularly the effects of data link quality, availability, latency (especially for voice signals) Demonstrate operational procedures: o o o Nominal procedures between ATC and RPAS Handover between different controllers (tower, approach) Contingencies / recovery procedures 1.1 Glossary of terms 1.2 Acronyms and Terminology Term Definition AMSL ANSP ATC ATCo Above Mean Sea Level Air Navigation Service Provider Air Traffic Control Air Traffic Controller 8 of 74

9 Term Definition ATM C2 CONOPS D&A DGAC DSAC DSNA ENAC EPIS-CA EUROCAE ft IAF IFR IR JARUS MASPS MOPS NM NOTAM ODREA OFA OPV RCF RPA RPAS RPS Air Traffic Management Command and Control Concept of Operations Detect and Avoid Direction Générale de l Aviation Civile Direction de la Sécurité de l Aviation Civile Direction des Services de Navigation Aérienne Ecole Nationale de l Aviation Civile Evaluation d Impact sur la Sécurité Aéroportuaire Airspace / Airport Safety Impact Assessment European Organisation for Civil Aviation Equipment feet Initial Approach Fix Instruments Flight Rules Infra Red Joint Authorities for Rulemaking of Unmanned Systems Minimum Aviation System Performance Standard Minimum Operational Performance Standard Nautical Mile Notice for Airmen Operational Demonstration of RPAS in European Airspace Operational Focus Areas Optionally Piloted Aircraft Rockwell Collins France Remotely Piloted Aircraft Remotely Piloted Aircraft System Remote Pilot Station 9 of 74

10 Term Definition RTCA SESAR SESAR Programme SID SJU RTCA Inc., formerly Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics Single European Sky ATM Research Programme The programme which defines the Research and Development activities and Projects for the SJU. Standard Instrument Departure SESAR Joint Undertaking (Agency of the European Commission) SJU Work Programme The programme which addresses all activities of the SESAR Joint Undertaking Agency. STAR TAS TRA UAV VFR VMC WP Latency (in voice communications) Remote Pilot Safety Pilot Standard Terminal Arrival Traffic Awareness System Temporary Restricted Area Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Visual Flight Rules Visual Meteorological Conditions Work Package Latency was defined as the period of time between the moment the controller/remote pilot speaks and the moment the remote pilot/controller hears the instruction. ODREA initially considered 5-10 seconds latencies, but this was refined to 4 seconds for realism and simplicity in the simulations setup. Remote Pilot (s) managed remotely the Patroller s flights from the actual remote pilot station (RPS) during the real-time simulations (EXE-RPAS ) and the demonstration flights (EXE-RPAS ). In the first case, the RPS was located in Pontoise (north of Paris) and the remote pilot interacted with the controllers through voice over IP. In the second case, the RPS was located in Muret (south of Toulouse) and the remote pilot interacted with the controllers through VHF relayed by the RPA. A Safety Pilot was present on board the Patroller for safety purposes during the demonstration flights (EXE-RPAS ). Since the RPA is not equipped with a certified detect and avoid suite, the safety pilot was mandatory to be able to press the red button and override the automation and remotely commanded actions from the remote pilot should an unplanned emergency situation occur. 10 of 74

11 2 Context of the Demonstrations RPAS missions development is currently hampered by the difficulty to access non-segregated airspace, whether civilian or military, for regulatory and technical reasons. Since an RPA is considered as an aircraft, it shall have an airworthiness document and follow the rules of air traffic defined within the airspace it evolves in and is to be operated by a crew holding licenses and recognized qualifications. Work is undertaken, both military and civilian side, to define the airworthiness codes and technical certification adapted to the RPAS specificities. The absence of a pilot on board introduces specific failure modes such as loss of command & control link that shall activate automated procedures to complete the flight safely. Also, compliance with rules of the air is one of the main difficulties insofar as the absence of a pilot on board does not respect the rule of "See and Avoid" to prevent mid-air collision. This leads to operate most often RPAS segregated from other airspace users. Although specific procedures are defined and allow RPA to transit while in cruise over France ( Smart Segregation ), take-off and landing are still performed from segregated airfields where all other traffic is stopped during RPAS operations. In an objective to favour seamless integration of RPAS, operational rules shall be defined for take-off, en route, approach and landing, derived from existing practices in manned aviation though taking into account the RPAS specificities. Hence, the overall objective of the ODREA project was to demonstrate integration of a large RPA (Sagem s Patroller ) into the managed traffic of a middle size commercial airport, Toulouse-Blagnac (LFBO). Moreover, RPAS specific non-nominal situations such as Detect and Avoid (D&A) as well as Command and Control (C2) link loss were addressed. During the demonstration flights, the RPA was operated from its remote pilot station located at Muret- Lherm airfield. For all the defined scenarios, the RPA taxied and took-off from Muret-Lherm, transited to Toulouse-Blagnac, was integrated in the approach sequence before performing a missed approach and returning to Muret-Lherm, flying non-segregated from other traffic. Nevertheless, for safety reasons, the detect and avoid exercises were performed in a temporary restricted area into which only the two aircraft participating to the ODREA exercises, i.e. the Patroller and a plastron aircraft, were allowed to fly. 2.1 Scope of the demonstration and complementarity with the SESAR Programme The ODREA project was expected to investigate the following aspects of RPAS insertion in civilian airspaces: Definition and validation of procedures in aerodrome circulation, including departure and arrival phases of flight, Capability to issue an IFR-like flight plan for RPAS, Capability to integrate a MALE RPAS into the managed air traffic of a middle sized commercial airport, Capability to follow adapted departure and arrival procedures from/to a middle sized commercial airport, Capability to conduct all three types of missions (point to point, planned and unplanned aerial work) in lower airspace, including abnormal situations. For that purpose, the project merged simulation and demonstration flight activities: Simulations: the main objectives of the simulations were to assist in the definition and the validation of operational procedures managing RPAS within representative controlled traffic. Moreover, the simulation framework was used to perform deeper analysis of some situations and environments without over costs that would have resulted from actual flights though allowing assessment of human factors with representative controller and remote pilot stations 11 of 74

12 Demonstration Flights: the main objectives of the demonstration flights were twofold: 1. Demonstrate that RPAS can be interfaced with standard civil ATC and exchange data to be managed as other commercial aircraft by civil operator 2. Demonstrate Detect & Avoid capabilities with respect to other traffic, both on the airport surface and in the air Geographical Coverage The geographical coverage of the exercises was the south western part of France around Toulouse- Blagnac. Nevertheless, 3 test sites were selected for the Demonstration Flights: 1. Toulouse-Blagnac (LFBO): A mid-size international commercial airport, ranked 6 th in France reporting over 95,000 movements in Muret-Lherm (LFBR): A general aviation aerodrome located 20 km south of Toulouse- Blagnac, reporting 88,000 movements in A Temporary Restricted Area (TRA) at Bédeille (close to St Girons aerodrome): A 400 km 2 segregated area used to perform the Detect & Avoid exercises safely Figure 1 below provides an overview of the demonstration exercises geographical coverage around the 3 locations. The simulations, which included fast time and real time simulations, covered large areas around Toulouse-Blagnac. The demonstration flights covered the area surrounding LFBO and LFBR for the integration exercises, as well as the area north of Saint-Girons (TRA at Bédeille) for the D&A exercises. Figure 1: Demonstration Exercises Geographical Coverage 12 of 74

13 2.1.2 Tailored Trajectories A series of tailored trajectories were defined by ENAC s PANS-OPS team, taking benefit of the RPA s flight performance (slow speed (80 kt max), hence short turn, and absence of passengers, hence steep descent rate (up to 9 )) 1 as well as local ATM operational and environmental constraints. These tailored trajectories included: Departure from and arrival to Muret-Lherm (LFBR) Departure from and arrival to Toulouse-Blagnac (LFBO) Transit (POGO) between the two aerodromes An example of tailored trajectory for approaching runway 32L and 14R at LFBO is provided below. Other charts can be found in Appendix A. Figure 2: Tailored Trajectories - Approach RWY32L and RWY14R at LFBO The difference between the tailored trajectory defined for Patroller and the standard approach defined for commercial aircraft when approaching the RWY32L is depicted Figure 3 below. As can be seen, the turn radius is much shorter and the slope steeper, which results in the following benefits: Minimum occupation of the final approach segment Final segment flown higher in order to avoid wake turbulence from previous aircraft 1 The tailored procedures were defined with 70 kt for approach speed and 9 approach slope for the Patroller, whereas standard procedures are defined with 220 kt approach speed and 3 approach slope for commercial airliners. 13 of 74

14 Figure 3: Approach RWY32L at LFBO: RPA (green) vs. Airliner (magenta) C2 Link Loss Procedure Discussing with controllers during presentations and briefings on the different exercises, a C2 link loss procedure was defined and be validated both through real time simulations and then through demonstration flights. Based on current work by EUROCAE WG73 2, the procedure was slightly modified as follows: 1. Stick to the plan until Initial Approach Fix (IAF) when Flight Management System (FMS) is engaged, or Direct to IAF when flying radar vectors: this is foreseen more simple and predictable than defining suitable alternates either a priori or dynamically 2. Orbit or spiral at IAF to proper altitude during 7 minutes: this leaves time for the controller to organize surrounding traffic while the RPA is at a well-known location, i.e. IAF 3. Initiate Approach and Automatic Landing: this is using the tailored trajectories known by both the system and the controllers Demonstration Exercises The demonstrations were organized into three exercises: 1. Fast Time Simulations: EXE-RPAS Real Time Simulations: EXE-RPAS Demonstration Flights: EXE-RPAS Though not published yet, the EUROCAE WG73 C2 Lost Link OSED basically defines the procedure as follows: stick to the plan/vector for the next 7 minutes, than land on the nearest suitable alternate aerodrome. 14 of 74

15 Their objectives and the scenario for the Demonstration Flights are summarized in the next sections Demonstration Objectives ODREA addressed 3 main demonstration objectives categories: 1. RPAS integration into non segregated airspace: OBJ-RPAS Definition and demonstration of emergency procedures: OBJ-RPAS Definition and acceptance of RPAS typical mission procedures. OBJ-RPAS.06-3 These objectives are detailed in the table below: Identifier Objective Success Criterion OBJ-RPAS OBJ-RPAS OBJ-RPAS OBJ-RPAS OBJ-RPAS Verify RPAS can execute adapted SID/STAR patterns (tailored trajectories) in seamless way toward ATC Verify RPAS can fly en route without negative impact on the current capacity of the air traffic Evaluate D&A procedures and technology during en route flight Evaluate D&A impact on safety during encounters with TCAS equipped aircraft Evaluate D&A procedures and technology during taxi Concrete results filling operational and technical gaps for RPAS integration Design of procedures acceptable by both ATC and the remote pilot Key human factors concerns regarding data transmission between ATC and RPAS pilot Concrete results filling operational and technical gaps for RPAS integration. Key human factors concerns regarding data transmission between ATC and RPAS pilot Concrete results filling operational and technical gaps for RPAS integration. Design of emergency procedures acceptable by both ATC and the remote pilot Concrete results filling operational and technical gaps for RPAS integration. Design of emergency procedures acceptable by both ATC and the remote pilot Concrete results filling operational and technical gaps for RPAS integration. Design of emergency procedures acceptable by both ATC and the remote pilot 15 of 74

16 Identifier Objective Success Criterion OBJ-RPAS OBJ-RPAS Verify impact on ATC of proposed C2 lost link procedures Evaluate the acceptance by ATC of several RPA performing all types of missions Concrete results filling operational and technical gaps for RPAS integration. Design of emergency procedures acceptable by both ATC and the remote pilot Concrete results filling operational and technical gaps for RPAS integration. Key human factor feedback Table 1: Demonstration Objectives Demonstration Scenarios Three scenarios were defined to support flight test demonstrations: 1. First scenario (SCN-RPAS.06-01) was related to RPAS insertion in civilian traffic in nominal mode, with goal that RPAS will behave as much as possible as a manned aircraft, aiming at validating nominal mode procedures for en route, departure, arrival, etc, 2. Second scenario is dedicated to specific RPAS mission and interaction with other airspace users and ATC, 3. Third scenario focuses on degraded modes and emergency situation, such as collision avoidance and C² link loss. These scenarios, which took place in the area of Toulouse-Blagnac, a relevant airport regarding traffic and aircraft density, are summarized in the following table. Identifier Scenario Objective SCN-RPAS Nominal flight: standard procedures RPA is operated from Muret-Lherm. After taxi and take-off, it climbs to cruise altitude and performs en route flight under IFR condition. Then it flies to the Toulouse-Blagnac area and executes an arrival procedure. The procedure itself is adapted taking into account RPAS performances and traffic insertion constraints. RPAS performs an approach, a go around and executes a departure adapted procedure. It climbs to cruise altitude in an adapted stack and starts en-route cruise back to Muret-Lherm airfield to land and taxi to its parking position. Demonstrate that RPAS can be integrated using adapted procedures into non-segregated air space and mid-size civilian airport, without negative impact on traffic flow, ATC workload and safety 16 of 74

17 Identifier Scenario Objective SCN-RPAS SCN-RPAS Nominal flight: transfer to/from RPAS mission area RPAS is operated from Muret- Lherm. After taxi and take-off, it climbs to cruise altitude and performs en route flight under IFR condition. Then RPAS is re-routed to a specific and unplanned interest area that could be segregated, to perform a typical RPAS mission (observation, loitering ). After a period of time, RPAS requests to reenter non segregated area and to return to its original flight plan, or to fly to a known waypoint. This rerouting can be performed several times. At the end of the mission, RPAS follows it flight plan back to Muret-Lherm and lands and taxi to its parking position. Contingency situation (D&A, C2 link loss) RPAS is operated from Muret- Lherm. After taxi and take-off, it climbs to cruise altitude and perform en route flight under IFR condition. During en route flight, an encounter with another aircraft is created, in order to activate D&A system. D&A system propose a collision avoidance manoeuvre that is executed. Ground operator recovers the control of the RPAS when manoeuvre is completed. Then RPAS returns to its flight plan. This can be reproduced during climb or descent. RPAS continues en route flight, then C² link is lost (Datalink power off during a few second then on again to get monitoring). RPAS starts its recovery flight path as described in the procedure foreseen for standardization. ATC takes relevant actions. When exercise is considered completed, remote pilot recovers control of the RPA. This test can be reproduced at different stages of the flight path. Back to Muret-Lherm airfield to land and taxi to its parking position. Opportunistic ground detect and avoid is performed on Muret-Lherm taxiways, involving ENAC aircraft if needed (very low traffic on ground). Demonstrate that RPAS can execute its mission from non-segregated airspace without negative impact both on mission goals and ATC workload and safety. Verify the procedures proposed are relevant for C2 link loss, D&A. Verify impact on ATC and remote pilot workloads as well as airspace safety. Table 2: Demonstration Scenarios 17 of 74

18 2.1.5 Demonstration Exercises List The 3 following tables summarize key information regarding the different demonstration exercises. Demonstration Exercise ID and Title Leading organization Demonstration exercise objectives EXE-RPAS.06-01: RPAS integration evaluation in fast time simulation DSNA The main objectives of the simulations were to evaluate impact on safety of RPAS integration in non-segregated airspace, and also to make an evaluation of the compatibility with TCAS. OFA addressed Applicable Operational Context Demonstration Technique Number of trials OFA Enhanced ACAS RPAS operation in non-segregated airspace. RPA flying predefined patterns (qty 6) in multiple conflict positions (27) around random conflict locations (600) against TCAS equipped or not equipped commercial traffic flying < FL195 in the southwestern part of France. Fast time simulations Over 800,000 runs Table 3: EXE-RPAS Overview Demonstration Exercise ID and Title Leading organization Demonstration exercise objectives OFA addressed EXE-RPAS.06-02: RPAS integration evaluation in real time simulation DSNA The main objectives of the simulations were to assist in the definition and the validation of operational procedures managing RPAS within representative controlled traffic. OFA Enhanced ACAS OFA Ground Based Separation Provision in En Route OFA Ground Based Separation Provision in the TMA OFA ASEP (ASAS Separation) 18 of 74

19 Demonstration Exercise ID and Title Applicable Operational Context Demonstration Technique Number of trials EXE-RPAS.06-02: RPAS integration evaluation in real time simulation RPAS integration in non-segregated airspace. Up to 4 RPA flying among commercial traffic inbound and outbound of Toulouse-Blagnac. All RPAS presenting 4s latency 3 on voice communications. Nominal flights and non-nominal flights (C2 link loss) scenarios were trialed. Real time simulations 2 series of pairs of scenarios, respectively [reference + nominal] and [reference + non-nominal] performed by two groups of 7 controllers each. Each scenario lasted approximatively 45 minutes. Table 4: EXE-RPAS Overview Demonstration Exercise ID and Title Leading organization Demonstration exercise objectives OFA addressed Applicable Operational Context EXE-RPAS.06-03: Flight demonstrations Sagem The main objectives of the flight test demonstrations were to test and validate in real condition the procedures assessed previously during simulations. Flight test covered normal and emergency conditions. OFA Enhanced ACAS OFA Ground Based Separation Provision in En Route OFA Ground Based Separation Provision in the TMA OFA ASEP (ASAS Separation) OFA Airport Operation Management RPAS integration in non-segregated airspace. Surface operations (taxiing) Muret-Lherm, transit towards Toulouse-Blagnac, insertion in Toulouse- Blagnac s traffic for approach and missed-approach, transit and landing at Muret-Lherm. Integration following defined procedures (nominal and non-nominal situations) or radar vectoring. Detect and Avoid against a general aviation aircraft in non-controlled airspace. 3 Latency was defined as the period of time between the moment the controller/remote pilot speaks and the moment the remote pilot/controller hears the instruction. ODREA initially considered 5-10 seconds latencies, but this was refined to 4 seconds for realism and simplicity in the simulations setup. 19 of 74

20 OBJ-RPAS (Adapted SID/STAR) OBJ-RPAS (Impact on capacity) OBJ-RPAS (D&A during en route) OBJ-RPAS (Impact on TCAS aircraft) OBJ-RPAS (D&A during taxi) OBJ-RPAS (C2 lost link procedure) OBJ-RPAS (Multiple RPA) Project Number RPAS.06 Edition Demonstration Exercise ID and Title Demonstration Technique Number of trials EXE-RPAS.06-03: Flight demonstrations Flight demonstrations 10 integrations into Toulouse-Blagnac traffic. 5 Detect & Avoid exercises inside the temporary restricted area defined around Bédeille. Table 5: EXE-RPAS Overview The following matrix summarizes the coverage of Demonstration Objectives by the different Demonstration Exercises. EXE-RPAS Fast Time Simulations EXE-RPAS Real Time Simulations EXE-RPAS Demonstration Flights x x x x x x x x x x Table 6: Coverage of Demonstration Objectives by Demonstration Exercises Matrix Demonstration Exercises Schedule The following figure depicts when the ODREA Demonstration Exercises have been accomplished. 20 of 74

21 Figure 4: Demonstration Exercises Schedule As shown, Fast Time Simulations (EXE-RPAS ) were undertaken in two phases and ran in parallel with the other exercises. Also, the approach for conducting the Demonstration Flights (EXE- RPAS ) was to have the procedures and tailored trajectories first validated through Real Time Simulations (EXE-RPAS ). 21 of 74

22 3 Programme Management 3.1 Organisation The consortium consisted of 4 partners: Rockwell Collins France: a professional electronics company providing solutions to government and commercial customers worldwide, among which various European RPAS manufacturers. Sagem: RPAS operator and manufacturer, the Defense Electronics Company of Safran group, owns a 20-year experience of RPAS systems design and operations, and brings a widely recognized expertise in the area of RPAS air traffic insertion DSNA: the French Air Navigation Service Provider (ANSP), providing trained ATCo personal, as well as airport/airspace access, involved from the start to define a framework to integrate operational RPAS with minimal impacts in ATC, to validate a process to assess concepts and assumptions and, at the end of the project, propose updated concepts of operations (CONOPS) and recommendations ENAC: the French University of Civil Aviation, brings a UAV Laboratory focused on applied research on RPA System and regulation in relation with DGAC More details on the different partners and respective contributions can be found in [1]. Their roles and expectations are listed in the following table. Partner Role Expectations RCF Coordinator WP500 Leader Safe and acceptable (ATCo, RPAS, remote pilot) procedures. Acceptable RPAS technology. Sagem WP100 Leader WP300 Leader Affordable procedures. Validity and feasibility of D&A performances and requirements. DSNA WP200 Leader Seamless RPAS integration. ENAC WP400 Leader Better understanding of human factors and system interactions related to RPAS integration. Table 7: Partners Roles and Expectations 3.2 Work Breakdown Structure The ODREA Project is articulated around 5 work packages as depicted Figure 5: 1) WP100: Project Description, led by Sagem 2) WP200: Scenarios Definition and Validation, led by DSNA 3) WP300: Flight Demonstrations, led by Sagem 4) WP400: Communication, led by ENAC 5) WP500: Project Management, led by RCF 22 of 74

23 More details on the objectives and contents of different work packages can be found in [1]. Figure 5: Work Packages Organisation 3.3 Deliverables Formal deliverables included: D01: Demonstration Plan [1] D02: Demonstration Report (this document) Internal deliverable included: B21: Fast Time Simulations Report B22: Real Time Simulations Report B31: Demonstration Flights Report 3.4 Risk Management Project risks have been identified and mitigation actions defined as listed hereafter. Risk Description Probability Severity Mitigation Actions Owner (L/M/H) (L/M/H) 23 of 74

24 Risk Description Probability Severity Mitigation Actions Owner (L/M/H) (L/M/H) WP200#1 Unexpected procedure definition / change limitations WP200#2 Simulators interface inadequacies WP300#1 Inability to organize expected number of demo flights WP300#2 Inability to obtain authorizations WP300#3 Inability to draw concluding insight WP400#1 Failure to organize final event WP500#1 Problem Identification & Resolution Completeness WP500#2 Risk of not having all partners aligned with goals & objectives M H M H H L L L L L Procedures defined in collaboration between ANSP and RPAS operator, will be tested in simulation. Early communication between ENAC and SAGEM, IVY bus installed in SAGEM facilities and VPN owned by ENAC. Expected flight test campaign duration is 1 week. Available slot is 2 weeks. Patroller authorized to fly in OPV mode. Meeting scheduled January 2014 with controllers in Toulouse. Questionnaires and tests used during real time simulation elaborated with human factors specialists. ENAC DSNA Sagem Sagem ENAC M L ENAC M M L L Table 8: Risks List Strong coordination (teleconf, meetings) and critical tasks prepared in advance. Early clarification of demonstration objectives and strong coordination through teleconf and meetings. All All 24 of 74

25 4 Conduct of Demonstration Exercises 4.1 Exercises Preparation Preparation of the Fast Time Simulations The following activities were conducted in preparation of the Fast Time Simulations: Setup of the simulation environment at DSNA premises by integrating Sagem s D&A system model into DSNA s EASY simulation suite Deployment over 30 computers to run the simulations in parallel Definition and generation of 6 RPA flight patterns in order to have realistic conflict geometries Further details can be found Preparation of the Real Time Simulations The following activities were conducted in preparation of the Real Time Simulations: Setup of the simulation environment at Toulouse-Blagnac Tower and connection to Sagem s Remote Pilot Station for data exchanges as well as voice communications Briefing of the controllers Dry run of the scenarios Design of a questionnaire to collect the controllers feedback after the simulations Further details can be found Preparation of the Flight Demonstrations The following activities were conducted in preparation of the Flight Demonstrations: Design of the tailored trajectories allowing integration at Toulouse-Blagnac and Muret-Lherm, as well as transit between the two airports Sites survey to assess line of sight communications quality between Muret, Blagnac and Bédeille Safety Study to identify hazards and mitigate those. This activity resulted in issuing and publishing an AIP-SUP, a NOTAM and Information Letters Design and distribution of briefing material to the controllers Provision artefacts necessary for the grant of the Permit to Fly Design of a questionnaire to collect the controllers feedback after the sorties Further details can be found of 74

26 4.2 Exercises Execution Actual dates for both the exercises execution and their respective analysis are provided in the following table: Exercise ID EXE-RPAS EXE-RPAS EXE-RPAS Exercise Title Fast Time Simulations Real Time Simulations Demonstration Flights Actual Exercise execution start date Actual Exercise execution end date Actual Exercise analysis start date Actual Exercise analysis end date 02/07/ /02/ /02/ /02/ /09/ /10/ /10/ /02/ /10/ /11/ /11/ /02/2015 Table 9: Exercises Execution/Analysis Dates 4.3 Deviations from the planned activities Very few deviations from the planned activities were reported: 1. EXE-RPAS _Dev1 Single RPA performance : a single RPA speed, corresponding to the Patroller s flight performance was used, instead of 3 as initially planned. (See details in ) 2. EXE-RPAS _Dev2 Multiple RPA patterns : multiple (6) RPA patterns were used to generate conflicting trajectories, instead of 1 as initially planned. (See details in ) 3. EXE-RPAS _Dev1 No Engine Failure exercise : engine failure exercises were not completed on request from the controllers though initially planned and discussed during demonstration flights briefings. (See details in ) 26 of 74

27 Exercise ID EXE-RPAS.06- Demonstration Objective ID OBJ-RPAS.06- Demonstration Objective Status Project Number RPAS.06 Edition Exercises Results 5.1 Summary of Exercises Results The following table summarizes the exercises results: Demonstration Objective Tittle Success Criterion Exercise Results 001 RPAS Integration Evaluation in Fast Time Simulations 02.2 D&A impact on safety during encounters with TCAS equipped aircraft Concrete results filling operational and technical gaps for RPAS integration Factor 10 improvement for the probability of collision when coordinated with TCAS D&A Only leads to a probability of collision avoidance of , though the D&A algorithm did not trigger properly in situations of overtaking by a commercial aircraft OK RPAS Integration Evaluation in Fast Time Simulations RPAS Integration Evaluation in Real Time Simulations D&A impact on safety during encounters with TCAS equipped aircraft Design of emergency procedures acceptable by both ATC and the remote pilot Execution of adapted SID/STAR patterns (tailored trajectories) in seamless way toward ATC Concrete results filling operational and technical gaps for RPAS integration Positive behaviour of the D&A avoidance function during TCAS encounters, demonstrating its compatibility 4 with TCAS Tailored trajectories for departure, arrival and transit between airports were defined jointly with Controllers and RPAS operator. Nevertheless, there is a need for standard protection criteria not currently available in ICAO PANS-OPS. OK OK 002 RPAS Integration Evaluation in Real Time 01.1 Execution of adapted SID/STAR patterns Most controllers (60%) had no difficulty in OK 4 Demonstrating the D&A algorithm compatibility with TCAS was a matter of assessing possible interference that would impact the TCAS timelines or manoeuvres. It was demonstrated the proposed D&A manoeuvres, mainly lateral, didn t affect negatively the TCAS vertical manoeuvres. 27 of 74

28 Exercise ID EXE-RPAS.06- Demonstration Objective ID OBJ-RPAS.06- Demonstration Objective Status Project Number RPAS.06 Edition Demonstration Objective Tittle Success Criterion Exercise Results Simulations (tailored trajectories) in seamless way toward ATC Design of procedures acceptable by both ATC and the remote pilot managing the slow flying RPA and having them integrated in the approach sequence. Half reported benefits of tailored trajectories on the predictability of the approach path. 002 RPAS Integration Evaluation in Real Time Simulations 01.1 Execution of adapted SID/STAR patterns (tailored trajectories) in seamless way toward ATC Key human factors concerns regarding data transmission between ATC and RPAS pilot With current setup: No significant number of instructions or change in the instruction type (heading, level or speed change) was observed. Partly OK RPAS Integration Evaluation in Real Time Simulations RPAS Integration Evaluation in Real Time Simulations RPAS Integration Evaluation in Real Time Simulations Impact on the current capacity of the air traffic Concrete results filling operational and technical gaps for RPAS integration. Impact on the current capacity of the air traffic Key human factors concerns regarding data transmission between ATC and RPAS pilot Impact on ATC of proposed C2 lost link procedures Concrete results filling operational and In anticipation to the possible impacts of the RPAS low speed and lag in voice communications, controllers used larger separation minima. Nevertheless, they were able to vector and optimise the path of commercial flights. Controllers felt the airport capacity would decrease due to larger separations set to cope with lag (voice transmission latency). C2 Link Loss procedure (re) defined, tested and evaluated jointly with Controllers and RPAS operator. Feedback indicates its OK OK OK 5 The simulation setup allowed overlapping of voice communication to remain understandable. The overlapping resulted from the introduction of a 4-second latency in voice communications between the controllers and the remote pilots. 28 of 74

29 Exercise ID EXE-RPAS.06- Demonstration Objective ID OBJ-RPAS.06- Demonstration Objective Status Project Number RPAS.06 Edition Demonstration Objective Tittle Success Criterion Exercise Results technical gaps for RPAS integration. acceptability and efficiency. 002 RPAS Integration Evaluation in Real Time Simulations 02.4 Impact on ATC of proposed C2 lost link procedures Design of emergency procedures acceptable by both ATC and the remote pilot Most controllers (80%) felt comfortable with the C2 link loss procedure as long as the procedure was known and followed. OK 002 RPAS Integration Evaluation in Real Time Simulations 03.1 Acceptance by ATC of several RPA performing all types of missions Concrete results filling operational and technical gaps for RPAS integration No separation infringements were observed during the simulations, and 90% of the controllers felt the situation (approach sequence) safe OK 002 RPAS Integration Evaluation in Real Time Simulations 03.1 Acceptance by ATC of several RPA performing all types of missions Key human factor feedback Most controllers (60%) had no difficulty in managing the slow flying RPA and having them (3 to 4) integrated in the approach sequence. Some reported increase in the workload due to uncertainties of the RPA behaviour OK 003 Flight Demonstrations Flight Demonstrations 01.1 Execution of adapted SID/STAR patterns (tailored trajectories) in seamless way toward ATC Design of procedures acceptable by both ATC and the remote pilot Execution of adapted SID/STAR patterns (tailored trajectories) in seamless way toward ATC The RPA was capable of following the tailored trajectories (as well as the radar vectoring) without any problem Most controllers (75%) reported no difficulty to insert an RPA in the approach sequence Most controllers (80%) reported no impact of lag leading to clearances updates or strategy change. OK OK 29 of 74

30 Exercise ID EXE-RPAS.06- Demonstration Objective ID OBJ-RPAS.06- Demonstration Objective Status Project Number RPAS.06 Edition Demonstration Objective Tittle Success Criterion Exercise Results Key human factors concerns regarding data transmission between ATC and RPAS pilot Impact on the current capacity of the air traffic Some issues with the use of standard terminology by the remote pilot were reported by the controllers and lead to a change of remote pilot No impact on capacity was reported Flight Demonstrations 01.2 Concrete results filling operational and technical gaps for RPAS integration. The prioritisation of commercial traffic upon the RPA was respected. OK 003 Flight Demonstrations 01.2 Impact on the current capacity of the air traffic Key human factors concerns regarding data transmission between ATC and RPAS pilot Most controllers (80%) reported no impact of lag leading to clearances updates or strategy change OK 003 Flight Demonstrations 02.1 D&A procedures and technology during en route flight Concrete results filling operational and technical gaps for RPAS integration Both slow beam and head on encounters were demonstrated against ENAC s BE58 or TB20 aircraft as intruder flying kt, whereas the RPA flew 80 kt. Performance of current D&A Demonstrator was assessed (avoidance manoeuvre initiated at 700 m range from the intruder in the slow beam case, and 1200 m in the head on case, some false IR tracks resulting in nuisance alerts, TAS data association confirming OK 6 The flight demonstrations were organized such that the RPA insertion in LFBO occurred when traffic density was lower than 10 movements per hour. 30 of 74

31 Exercise ID EXE-RPAS.06- Demonstration Objective ID OBJ-RPAS.06- Demonstration Objective Status Project Number RPAS.06 Edition Demonstration Objective Tittle Success Criterion Exercise Results the IR tracks). 003 Flight Demonstrations Flight Demonstrations Flight Demonstrations Flight Demonstrations Flight Demonstrations 02.4 D&A procedures and technology during en route flight Design of emergency procedures acceptable by both ATC and the remote pilot D&A procedures and technology during taxi Concrete results filling operational and technical gaps for RPAS integration D&A procedures and technology during taxi Design of emergency procedures acceptable by both ATC and the remote pilot Impact on ATC of proposed C2 lost link procedures Concrete results filling operational and technical gaps for RPAS integration. Impact on ATC of proposed C2 lost link procedures Design of emergency procedures acceptable by both ATC and the remote pilot Automatic collision avoidance enabled 0.7 to 1.2 km away from the intruder No collision situation reported during taxi phases controlled through the RPA s panoramic camera. No collision situation reported during taxi phases controlled through the RPA s panoramic camera. C2 Link Loss procedure (re) defined jointly with Controllers and RPAS operator, and validated through RT-Simulations. The C2 link loss procedure was completed twice in LFBR, and performed as expected OK OK Partly OK 7 OK OK Table 10: Summary of Demonstration Exercises Results 7 As planned, D&A during surface operations was meant to be opportunistic. There was no provoked occurrence of taxiway or runway incursion to assess the procedures. 31 of 74

32 5.2 Choice of metrics and indicators The following table below summarizes main KPA, and associated metrics and indicators, for each objective identified in Objective ID KPA Success Criterion / Expected Benefit OBJ-RPAS Human Factors Acceptability by ATCo > 50% OBJ-RPAS Capacity Acceptable impact on capacity OBJ-RPAS Safety Limited or acceptable impact on airspace safety OBJ-RPAS Safety Limited or acceptable impact on airspace safety OBJ-RPAS Safety Limited or acceptable impact on airspace safety OBJ-RPAS Human Factors Acceptability by ATCo > 50% OBJ-RPAS Human Factors Acceptability by ATCo > 50% Result of the demonstration More than 60% ATCo reported no difficulty No impact on capacity reported during Demonstration Flights No impact on safety reported during Demonstration Flights Factor 10 improvement for the probability of collision when coordinated with TCAS No collision situation reported during taxi phases 80% ATCo felt comfortable with the C2 link loss procedure 60% controllers had no difficulty integrating up to 4 RPA in approach sequence Table 11: Summary of Metrics and Indicators 5.3 Summary of Assumptions There are no issues to be reported regarding to the assumptions specified in the Demonstration Plan [1]. As a reminder, these assumptions were: DAS-RPAS Patroller inter-visibility (LOS datalink): the sites were assessed and procedures defined accordingly DAS-RPAS Demonstration process (Tailored trajectories): as planned, the trajectories for departure, transit and approach for the two airports were validated during real time simulations prior to the demonstration flights DAS-RPAS Patroller OPV: as expected, the option of having a safety pilot on-board while the aircraft was remotely piloted was an enabler for the demonstration flights Results per KPA The following table summarizes metrics and indicators per exercise for each main KPA. 32 of 74

33 Objective Id OBJ-RPAS.06- Exercise Id EXE-RPAS.06- Project Number RPAS.06 Edition KPA Success Criterion / Expected Benefit Safety Limited or acceptable impact on airspace safety Safety Limited or acceptable impact on airspace safety Safety Limited or acceptable impact on airspace safety Result of the demonstration No impact on safety reported during Demonstration Flights Factor 10 improvement for the probability of collision when coordinated with TCAS No collision situation reported during taxi phases Capacity Acceptable impact on capacity Foreseen decrease due to larger separations to cope with speed and possible lag issues Capacity Acceptable impact on capacity No impact on capacity reported during Demonstration Flights Human Factors Acceptability by ATCo > 50% 60% ATCo reported no difficulty Human Factors Acceptability by ATCo > 50% 75% ATCo reported no difficulty Human Factors Acceptability by ATCo > 50% 80% ATCo felt comfortable with the C2 link loss procedure Human Factors Acceptability by ATCo > 50% C2 link loss procedure was completed twice in LFBR, and performed as expected Human Factors Acceptability by ATCo > 50% 60% controllers had no difficulty integrating up to 4 RPA in approach sequence Table 12: Summary of Results per KPA Impact on Safety, Capacity and Human Factors As can be read in Table 12 above, the Real Time Simulation (EXE-RPAS ) and the Demonstration Flights (EXE-RPAS ) exercises brought no evidence of negative impact on Safety, Capacity and Human Factors. Both exercises show the operational and technical feasibility of integrating RPA on a mid-size commercial airport, provided traffic distribution permits. The Fast Time Simulations (EXE-RPAS ) dedicated to Detect & Avoid demonstrated positive benefit for Safety, especially when coordination is performed with TCAS equipped aircraft Description of assessment methodology The assessment methodology relied on analysis of: Logged data (typically relative position and trajectories of the different movements) for EXE- RPAS , -002 and -003 Feedback from ATCo having participated to EXE-RPAS and -003 through questionnaires 33 of 74

34 Feedback from observers having participated to EXE-RPAS and -003 The ODREA project did not request assistance from WP Results impacting regulation and standardisation initiatives The results from EXE-RPAS showed positive improvements to Safety, along with those from EXE-RPAS.003 indicating what was achievable with the actual D&A Demonstrator. The figures will need to be compared with commonly approved figures from standards (i.e. MASPS and MOPS) to be provided to industry. The results from EXE-RPAS and -003 showed the benefits of using tailored trajectories as well as pre-defined (and exchanged) C2 link loss procedures. Again these need to be jointly defined between ATCo and industry, and possibly standardized. EXE-RPAS highlighted that fluency with the aeronautical terminology was key for integrating RPAS in controlled airspace. Regulation should be set in place in terms of remote pilot training, and make sure they are fluent with commercial aviation terminology. 5.4 Analysis of Exercises Results Please refer to for an overview of the exercises results Unexpected Behaviours/Results Very few unexpected behaviours and results were reported: 1. EXE-RPAS _Unex1 D&A and overtaking : the D&A software behaved unexpectedly during encounters with an overtaking aircraft due to the current implementation of the Right of Way rules. (See details in ) 2. EXE-RPAS _Unex1 Lag and overlap : the Real Time Simulation setup allowed overlapping of voice communication to remain understandable. (See details in ) 3. EXE-RPAS _Unex1 Incursion in TRA : even though everything had been set in place to conduct the D&A exercises safely in the TRA, a VFR incursion occurred during the sortie. The situation was managed and did not impact the sortie. (See details in ) 5.5 Confidence in Results of Demonstration Exercises Quality of Demonstration Exercises Results The high quality of demonstration results was provided by use of actual assets, i.e. D&A Demonstrator software (EXE-RPAS ), Remote Pilot Station (EXE-RPAS ), RPA and D&A Demonstrator (EXE-RPAS ), as well as representative assets, i.e. validated TCAS models (EXE-RPAS ) and ATCo position (EXE-RPAS ) Significance of Demonstration Exercises Results Statistical significance of the demonstration results can be assumed due to the amount of runs (EXE- RPAS and -002) and sorties (EXE-RPAS ), as well as feedback through briefing and questionnaires (EXE-RPAS and -003). Operational significance of the demonstration results can be assumed due to the representativeness of scenarios (EXE-RPAS , -002 and -003) having been generated using actual traffic (EXE- RPAS ), or records of actual traffic (EXE-RPAS and -002). 34 of 74

35 5.5.3 Conclusions and recommendations The ODREA demonstrations, based on Fast Time Simulations (EXE-RPAS ), Real Time Simulations (EXE-RPAS ) and Demonstrations Flights (EXE-RPAS ), provided fruitful results which are relevant for further steps in integrating RPAS in non-segregated airspace. Fast Time Simulations showed the benefits of D&A technology on Safety, while Real Time Simulations and Demonstration Flights demonstrated the technical and operational feasibility of integrating RPA into the traffic of a mid-size commercial airport, taking benefit of tailored trajectories and pre-defined emergency procedures. The ODREA project basically covered the departure (EXE-RPAS and -003), en-route (EXE- RPAS , -002 and -003) and approach phases of flight (EXE-RPAS and -003), though remotely piloted taxiing was demonstrated during the Demonstration Flights exercise (EXE-RPAS ). As can be read in their respective sections, the recommendations from the different demonstration exercises are articulated around the following: 1. Need for Standardisation on D&A (EXE-RPAS _Reco1) 2. Need for Continuation of the Exercises (provided fit of the environment (EXE-RPAS _Reco1)) for: D&A (EXE-RPAS _Reco2) and (EXE-RPAS _Reco4) Impact of latency on voice communications, i.e. lag, (EXE-RPAS _Reco1) Demystifying RPAS and foster exchanges between all ATM communities (EXE- RPAS _Reco3) and (EXE-RPAS _Reco2) 3. Need for Further Studies and Joint Activities on: C3 developments and SESAR Concepts for RPAS (EXE-RPAS _Reco2) Design of tailored trajectories (EXE-RPAS _Reco3) Minimum requirements for RPAS routine IFR flights (EXE-RPAS _Reco3) 35 of 74

36 6 Demonstration Exercises reports 6.1 Demonstration Exercise EXE-RPAS Fast Time Simulations Report Exercise Scope The Fast Time Simulations were conducted to study the efficiency of RPAS Detect & Avoid. The main objectives of these simulations are to evaluate impact on safety of RPAS integration in nonsegregated airspace, and also to make an evaluation of the compatibility with TCAS. The simulations are based on a large amount of recorded actual controlled flights having taken place in the south western part of France (between Toulouse-Blagnac and Bordeaux-Mérignac). Simulated RPA traffic was inserted in order to create mid-air collision situations between aircraft and the RPA and analyse the behaviour of the different movements. The geometry of the observed conflicts and avoidance manoeuvres performed by the two logics, respectively D&A for the RPA and TCAS for the aircraft, in different combinations was studied in order to validate the de-confliction strategy of RPAS Conduct of Demonstration Exercise Exercise Preparation The exercise was performed using simulation tools from ENAC and DSNA as well as a D&A system model from Sagem. The software environment was deployed over 30 computers running the different scenarios in parallel. The overall setup is depicted Figure 6 below. Figure 6: EXE-RPAS Fast Time Simulations Overall Setup 36 of 74

37 The main simulation tools from DSNA s EASY simulation suite that were used were: IVY bus: this virtual bus was used by the different applications involved in the simulation to exchange data REJEU: this application was used to replay recorded aircraft flight paths TCAS model: the TCAS models included the TCAS logic. They were used to test and validate the interaction between the D&A system and TCAS Aircraft models: these models simulated aircrafts, manned or unmanned, and included basic flight performances The D&A system model included sensors models, actual data fusion and avoidance algorithm and coordination link with TCAS messages needed for interoperability with TCAS. Sensors models were simplified in order to cope with computation time constraints. Nevertheless, their behaviour was validated against real flight data. The D&A system model was connected to the IVY bus, and the simulation defined in which aircraft this function is implemented and activated. The TCAS Models used were those used in TCAS events analysis. Their representativeness is validated. The TCAS module used for fast time simulation runs references algorithms from DSNA/DTI. The same module was used for SESAR projects such as WP482 (Evolution Airborne Safety Net) and on-going WP481 (Evolution Ground Base Safety Net). The traffic model was based on actual traffic, for which only the portion of a tracks that were long enough (> 4 minutes) in lower airspace (FL<195) was used. The simulation engine was adapted for the exercise mainly to augment the traffic position messages for the D&A module, provide one-second refresh rates. It was also instrumented for data collection and logging Exercise execution In order to have a sufficient number of mid-air collision situations in different conflict geometries, patterns for the RPA flights were defined. Indeed, the first runs with an RPA, or even a swarm of RPA, crossing the controlled traffic did not show a sufficient number of hits. Conflicts had to be provoked at randomly selected locations (approx. 500), from which the RPA trajectories were derived. Hence, the set of 6 predefined patterns, representative of RPA operations, was created: 1. Straight level flight 2. Straight climb 3. Straight descent 4. Circular level flight 5. Circular climb 6. Circular descent Also, in order to better assess values for the collision volume requested by the standardisation organisations, offsets were defined around the mid-air collision locations: Longitudinal (dx): NM, 0, NM Lateral (dy): NM, 0, NM Vertical (dz): -100 ft, 0, +100 ft 37 of 74

38 Finally, 4 different equipage combinations were set. These included: 1. TCAS only, i.e. the RPA was Mode S transponder equipped only 2. TCAS and D&A with no coordination (D&A triggers manoeuvre before TCAS does) 3. TCAS with D&A with coordination (D&A manoeuvre dependent on TCAS s) 4. D&A only All these combinations of locations, trajectories, offset and equipage were ran 3 times and resulted in 874,800 runs. EXE-RPAS was initiated July During the summer 2014, the setup was finalized and a first campaign performed with the straight level flight scenario. The initial findings showed the benefits of the D&A function in increasing the collision miss distance. A second campaign covering all combinations was performed during winter 2014, confirming the benefits of the D&A function in increasing the collision miss distance, though pinpointing few cases to be further analysed and discussed Deviation from the planned activities The following deviations from the Demonstration Plan [1] have been reported: EXE-RPAS _Dev1 Single RPA performance : Instead of 3 RPA speed categories (slow, medium, high), a single RPA speed was used during the exercise (slow) corresponding to the Patroller s flight performance due to time constraints in generating and then analysing the large amount of data collected during the runs. Focusing on the Patroller s performance adds to the consistency of the project for which only the Patroller was used during the Flight Demonstration Exercise (EXE-RPAS ), this latter including D&A dedicated flights. EXE-RPAS _Dev2 Multiple RPA patterns : Instead of 1 RPA trajectory that would basically cross the controlled traffic flow straight level and showed too low probability of collision, multiple (6) RPA patterns were used to generate conflicting trajectories. Though multiplying the number of cases and increasing the amount of data to be collected and analysed, this added to the relevance of the study in multiplying the geometries, still using relevant RPA mission patterns (transit, orbit and spiral) Exercise Results Summary of Exercise Results The following table summarizes the Fast Time Simulation results depending on the different equipage combinations. Probability of collision (PCOL), as well as average horizontal (DCPA) and vertical (DFL) miss distances are reported. TCAS Only TCAS + D&A TCAS + D&A D&A Only w/o coordination W/ Coordination PCOL DCPA 490 ft 590 ft 590 ft 670 ft DFL 600 ft 600 ft 600 ft 90 ft Table 13: EXE-RPAS Fast Time Simulations Results Summary As can be read above, associating TCAS and D&A reduces the collision risk in a meaningful way. 38 of 74

39 Nevertheless, further analysis in the behaviour of the D&A Demonstrator algorithms are required to fine tune its parameters and assess improvements of the probability of collision on specific cases such as overtaking from a high speed intruder. Indeed, 80% of the cases for which the D&A algorithm did not trigger properly were in situations of overtaking by a commercial aircraft. This figure has a major impact on the PCOL figure of the D&A Only case in Table 13. The implementation of the Right of Way rules (priority to the overtaken aircraft) by the current D&A algorithm needs to be discussed and clearly defined at regulatory and standardization level. Shall the D&A algorithm trigger a manoeuvre in case a TCAS equipped intruder does not timely react is a question to be addressed Results per KPA The identified KPA were: Safety: limited or acceptable impact on airspace safety TCAS compatibility: verification of D&A / TCAS coordination rules validity As can be read in Table 13 above: Safety: The D&A function increases meaningfully the safety level, especially when coordinated with TCAS TCAS compatibility: The D&A function increases meaningfully the safety level, both with and without coordination with TCAS Results impacting regulation and standardisation initiatives The results in Table 13 above indicate what was achievable with the actual D&A Demonstrator software. Though the figures show positive improvements to Safety, they need to be compared with commonly approved figures only standards (i.e. MASPS and MOPS) can provide industry with. Similarly, TCAS compatibility has been demonstrated based on two options (coordinated and noncoordinated). Standards must indicate which option shall be retained. The different standards shall provide figures for safety levels, performance and interoperability along with the concepts of operations and environment description. The ODREA project acknowledges, nevertheless, work on D&A standardization has been initiated within several working groups, such as EUROCAE WG73, RTCA SC228 and JARUS Unexpected Behaviours/Results EXE-RPAS _Unex1 D&A and overtaking : the D&A Demonstrator software behaved unexpectedly during some encounters with an overtaking commercial aircraft. The collision risk is underestimated and avoidance not always initiated. The implementation of the Right of Way rules needs to be discussed and standardized. (See details in discussion ) Quality of Demonstration Results The high quality of demonstration results was provided by use of actual software (i.e. D&A Demonstrator software) as well as representative reference software (i.e. validated TCAS models) in the simulation environment Significance of Demonstration Results Statistical significance of the demonstration results can be assumed due to the large amount of samples (874,800 runs) considered in the analysis. Operational significance of the demonstration results can be assumed due to the representativeness of scenarios (hence conflict geometries) having been generated by both the actual traffic records (realistic commercial traffic) and the RPA flight patterns (realistic mission patterns). 39 of 74

40 6.1.4 Conclusions and recommendations Conclusions In the course of EXE-RPAS Fast Time Simulations, the actual D&A demonstrator software was validated against a large series of encounters (874,800 runs) combining different conflict geometries and equipage combinations. The results show positive benefit on safety of the D&A function, with a factor 10 improvement for the probability of collision when coordinated with TCAS. Also, the results show positive behaviour of the D&A avoidance function during TCAS encounters, demonstrating its compatibility with TCAS. Though adding to the complexity of the simulation setup, 6 RPA flight patterns were generated, multiplying by the occasion the number of cases and runs to be analysed. Nevertheless, this approach augmented the operational significance of the exercise results since the patterns are representative of RPA missions or specific flight phases Recommendations EXE-RPAS _Reco1 D&A Standardisation : The figures show positive improvements to Safety by the D&A Demonstrator software. Nevertheless, safety objectives should be provided to the industry. However, the industry should develop technical standards suitable to achieve these safety objectives and finalise their development towards a certified D&A solution. EXE-RPAS _Reco2 Continuation : Also, continuation of the exercise is recommended when refining the D&A algorithms (incl. sensor models refinement) and maturing of the solution, and/or, when comparing the safety figures with those provided by the standards. 6.2 Demonstration Exercise EXE-RPAS Real Time Simulations Report Exercise Scope The Real Time Simulations were conducted to measure the impact in terms of operator workload and traffic efficiency of having several RPAS in the arrival, approach and departure procedures in a Terminal Area while realistic manned aircraft traffic is being managed. Normal procedures were performed, and the possible latency due to the beyond line of sight (BLOS) communications with the RPS using commercial SATCOM was tackled. In addition to operational procedures, the unusual RPAS C2 Link Loss procedure was proposed and evaluated. Human factor specialists have been involved in these simulations to evaluate the impact of the RPAS integration on the ATC working method. Various data have been recorded during the simulation and analysed later by statisticians and ergonomists. The simulations were based on recorded actual controlled flights having taken place inbound and outbound of Toulouse-Blagnac. Controllers from Toulouse-Blagnac tower and approach were asked to manage manned and remotely piloted traffic in different scenarios, providing instructions for the RPAS in their approach and landing phases. The objective of the exercise was to assess possible impact when integrating a couple of RPA in the TMA traffic on: Occupation of the frequency Distances flown Number of instructions and clearances 40 of 74

41 Delay of commercial flights, especially in the C2 link Loss case Conduct of Demonstration Exercise Exercise Preparation Setup The exercise was performed using simulation tools from ENAC and DSNA as well as an actual Remote Pilot Station from Sagem. This latter was located in Sagem s premises miles away from the simulated controller position and other simulation assets such as pseudo-pilots that were located in Toulouse-Blagnac s tower. A dedicated Virtual Private Network was used to connect the two sites, allowing data exchange and well as voice-over-ip communications. The overall setup for the exercise is depicted Figure 7 below. Figure 7: EXE-RPAS Real Time Simulations Overall Setup The main simulation tools from DSNA s EASY simulation suite that were used included: IVY bus: this virtual bus was used by the different applications involved in the simulation to exchange data REJEU: this application was used to replay recorded aircraft flight paths Aircraft models: these models simulated aircrafts, manned or unmanned, and included basic flight performances IRMA: From the ATC point of view, the simulation framework uses the real Approach Controller radar display (IRMA). This keeps the simulation close to operational controller environment 41 of 74

42 The ATCo simulated position (as depicted Figure 8) was close to an operational one, and included: The IRMA radar display A strip printer A strip table A bi-colour pen A Powermate for push-to-talk pedal Figure 8: EXE-RPAS Real Time Simulations ATCo Position Setup The Pseudo-pilot positions (as depicted Figure 9) were designed for reactivity, and were capable of piloting simulated commercial traffic as well as simulated RPA. A 4 seconds latency was introduced on all voice communications between the ATCo and the remote pilots at both the actual remote pilot station and the pseudo-pilot position.. The exercise was performed from DSAC-S facilities (Toulouse-Blagnac) in order to get the benefit of having controllers available. 42 of 74

43 Figure 9: EXE-RPAS Real Time Simulations Pseudo-Pilots Setup ATCo Briefing Prior to the exercise, the tailored procedures designed for integrating the Patroller into Toulouse- Blagnac s traffic were briefed to the controllers. Briefing material was made available, the same that would be used later for EXE-RPAS Demonstration Flights. Similarly, the defined C2 link loss procedure was explained and the pre-defined steps left permanently visible to the controller when performing the exercise. Figure 10 below depicts the whiteboard in the exercise room. 43 of 74

44 Figure 10: EXE-RPAS Real Time Simulations ATCo Briefing of C2 Link Loss Procedure Dry-Run In order to assess both the feasibility and the relevance of the exercise, the different scenarios were dry-run with a controller. This was an opportunity to finely tune the simulations in terms of traffic density, trajectories, event timeline, etc and make sure the level of workload was sufficient and sustainable on the one hand, and the duration not to exceed the controllers break time on the other hand. Indeed, the simulations were performed on a voluntary basis during the controllers breaks Questionnaire A questionnaire to be filled by the controllers after the simulations was put together in order to collect their feedback. The original version, in French, can be found Appendix B. Main questions were: 1. From your point of view, was the RPA behavior similar to a light manned aircraft during the different flight phases? In case your answer is no, what are the behavior aspects that differ from an light manned aircraft? 2. Did you experience latency between the time you provided clearance and the time RPA performed the manoeuver? In case your answer is yes, did that induce amendments or a change of strategy with regard to the foreseen situation? 3. Did you experience difficulties to integrate the RPAS in the approach phase or in airfield traffic? In case your answer is yes, what are the reasons of your difficulties in integrating the RPAS? 4. Was the time needed to transfer the RPAS from the control tower to the approach, or to other control areas, longer than for a manned aircraft? In case your answer is yes, did this additional delay impact safety? 5. Was the traffic safety insured? 44 of 74

45 In case your answer is no, for which reasons was the traffic safety altered? 6. Do you think the contingency procedures were adapted to the situation? In case your answer is no, which modifications would you suggest to make those procedures more efficient? 7. In case you would participate again in such an experimentation, which enhancement could be done in order to better integrate RPAS in your airspace and airports? Exercise execution Approach The approach taken for the exercise was to have controllers performing first a Reference Scenario allowing them to get familiar with the simulation setup (assets at the simulated controller position as well as traffic density) and then, perform one of the two RPAS dedicated scenario. The Reference Scenario only introduces slow flying aircraft (e.g. general aviation) into a relatively high (1.5 times nominal) density of traffic around Toulouse-Blagnac. The controllers are already used to managing such traffic Scenarios A 45 minutes traffic sample was prepared in order to be able to run a baseline simulation. Then up to 4 aircraft of the initial traffic sample were substituted by various RPAS types, with speeds between 90 and 250kt. All RPAS mimicked the use of a SATCOM system, with 4-second latency. The simulations lasted approximately 45 minutes. The context of the RT Simulation was a simulated approach on Toulouse-Blagnac using tailored trajectories for runway 32L designed by ENAC PANS OPS as well as the emergency procedure defined in case of C2 link loss. As depicted Figure 11 below, the RT Simulation scenarios included: Traffic for arrival from multiple directions (blue arrows) under radar vectoring or flying standard procedures, generating a quite high workload Traffic for departure towards multiple directions (red arrows) with few conflict, increasing nevertheless voice communications 45 of 74

46 Figure 11: EXE-RPAS Real Time Simulations Reference Scenario Inbound (blue) and Outbound (red) Traffic Flows Beside the Reference Scenario involving 29 commercial flights and 3 slow flying aircraft, 2 RPAS dedicated scenarios were defined: 1. A Nominal RPA Scenario involving: 30 commercial flights 2 slow flying RPA (same performance as Patroller) 1 fast flying RPA (same performance as ATR42) 2. A Degraded RPA Scenario (C2 link loss) involving: 30 commercial flights 2 slow flying RPA (same performance as Patroller) 1 fast flying RPA (same performance as ATR42) 46 of 74

47 Link failure on one of the Patroller Planning The exercise took place in a training room next to the Approach room in Toulouse-Blagnac s tower. A registration schedule was left for the controllers to volunteer and register on 1-hour slots for two scenarios (the Reference Scenario and one of the two RPAS Scenarios), Monday through Friday during 3 weeks in fall 2014 (W40, W41 and W42). Table 14 below summarizes the registrations, as well as slots during which Sagem s remote pilots were participating from their premises. In total, 23 controllers participated to the exercise. Nevertheless, due to operational constraints, some were not able to free themselves for the two scenarios. 14 controllers runs were retained for the analysis as having performed both Reference and RPA Scenarios. Participants contrôleurs Scénario Référence Scénario Drone On Scénario Drone Off Control_1 Simu_01 Simu_12 Control_2 Simu_02 Simu_06 Control_3 Simu_08 Simu_09 (P) Control_4 Simu_04 Simu_05 Simu_29 (P) Control_5 Simu_10 Simu_11 Control_6 03/10/14 AM Control_7 Simu_03 Simu_17 (P) Control_8 30/09/14 AM Control_9 Simu_07 Simu_16 (P) Control_10 01/10/14 PM 07/10/14 PM (D) Control_11 07/10/14 AM Control_12 Simu_14 Simu_13 (P) Control_13 Simu_15 Simu_19 (P) Control_14 Simu_18 Simu_22 (P) Control_15 08/10/14 AM 08/10/14 PM (P) Control_16 Simu_20 Simu_21 (P) Control_17 09/10/14 AM 09/10/14 PM (P) Control_18 Simu_23 Simu_24 (P) Control_19 14/10/14 AM 14/10/14 PM (P) Control_20 Simu_25 Simu_26 Control_21 Simu_27 Simu_28 (P) Control_22 15/10/14 PM (P) Control_23 Simu_30 Simu_31 (P) 14 Ctrls 14 Ref 7 On 7 Off contrôleur simul jouée mais JJ/mm/aa PM (P) non pris en compte non prise en compte simul incomplète contact Pontoise Table 14: EXE-RPAS Real Time Simulations Registration Planning Deviation from the planned activities No deviations from the Demonstration Plan [1] have been reported. 47 of 74

48 6.2.3 Exercise Results Summary of Exercise Results Statistical Results The following table summarizes the Real Time Simulation statistical results, obtained through analysis of data as well as voice communications records. The analysis compares data collected during the simulation runs from two groups of controllers, the ones having performed the Reference Scenario followed by the Nominal RPAS Scenario, and the ones having performed the Reference Scenario followed by the Degraded RPAS Scenario. The 4 combinations were respectively dubbed: REF_ON, ON, REF_OFF, OFF. Data REF_ON ON REF_OFF OFF Average number of instructions per run Average number of instructions per flight Average distance flown (NM) Mean duration for an instruction (sec) Total number of instructions Global frequency occupation ratio (%) Table 15: EXE-RPAS Real Time Simulations - Statistical Results Summary As can be read above, there was no significant difference between runs with and without RPA in the number and duration of instructions provided, nor in the distances flown. It appeared controllers optimized the trajectories in anticipation of possible issues with lag in the communications with the RPAS Questionnaires The following table summarizes the Real Time Simulation results obtained through analysis of feedback through the questionnaire from the controllers having performed the exercise. Feedback Answer Ratio Comments Comparison with light aircraft 50% Pros: trajectories predictability Cons: flight performance (speed, climb rate), possible issue with lag Impact of lag leading to clearances updates or strategy change Difficulty to insert an RPA in the approach sequence No (60%) No (60%) Lag only creates additional workload (wait for acknowledgement to clearances and instructions) Pros: tailored procedure Cons: impact on airport capacity (larger separation leading to delays for commercial flights) 48 of 74

49 Feedback Answer Ratio Comments Impact on safety No* (90%) (*) as long as only the approach sequence is considered Landing, taxying and exiting runway, missed approach which were not part of the exercise need further investigation. During these phases, everything goes faster ; it may be more difficult to manage an RPA, its behaviour around and on the runway/taxiway being unknown today to the controllers. C2 link loss procedure on Toulouse-Blagnac Ok* (*) 80% expressed feedback Ok as long as procedure is known and followed. Issue is what if something else occurs? Table 16: EXE-RPAS Real Time Simulations - Questionnaire Results Summary Results per KPA The identified KPA were: Safety: No impact on manned traffic and populations Capacity: No impact on manned traffic Human Factors: Acceptability by Controllers As can be read in Table 15 and Table 16 above: Safety: No separation infringements were observed during the simulations, and 90% of the controllers felt the situation (approach sequence only) safe. Further investigation and exercises required for other phases incl. landing and taxiing. Capacity: Capacity is a concern for the controllers who felt the airport capacity would decrease due to larger separations set to cope with speed and lag. Most (60%) had no difficulty in managing the slow flying RPA and having them integrated in the approach sequence. Also, no significant number of instructions or change in the instruction type (heading, level or speed change) was observed. Human Factors: Most controllers (60%) had no difficulty in managing the slow flying RPA and having them integrated in the approach sequence. Though some reported increase in the workload due to uncertainties of the RPA behaviour, half reported benefits of tailored trajectories on the predictability of the approach path, and all who expressed themselves on the C2 link loss procedure (80%) felt comfortable as long as the procedure was known and followed Results impacting regulation and standardisation initiatives The results in Table 15 and Table 16 above indicate how predictability in the behaviour of the RPAS plays a major role for their management by controllers. Tailored trajectories for approach to and departure from a controlled airport shall be exchanged with the controllers if not published as SID and 49 of 74

50 STAR procedures are prior to the operations. Similarly, the C2 link loss procedure shall be standardized. The ODREA project acknowledges, nevertheless, work on C2 link loss standardization has been initiated within several working groups, such as EUROCAE WG73, RTCA SC228 and JARUS Unexpected Behaviours/Results EXE-RPAS _Unex1 Lag and overlap : the Real Time Simulation setup showed some limitations with regard to the overlap of voice communications in presence of simulated lag with the RPAS. Indeed, the overlap of the simultaneous transmissions still allowed for understanding when listening, whereas both would have been scrambled in real life Quality of Demonstration Results As a consequence of the limitation of the Real Time Simulation setup with regard to the overlap of voice communications in presence of simulated lag with the RPAS described above, messages were repeated less often than expected initially. Otherwise, the feedback from the controllers indicates the ATCo position was realistic and representative of their own. Altogether with the use of the actual remote pilot station on the RPAS end, the assets used during the exercise bring a high level of confidence in the results Significance of Demonstration Results Statistical significance of the demonstration results can be assumed due to the amount of runs (twice seven) considered in the analysis, a total of 23 controllers having participated. Operational significance of the demonstration results can be assumed due to the representativeness of scenarios (nominal and degraded approaches on a mid-size commercial airport, different RPA performances ) having been generated using actual traffic records (realistic commercial traffic) Conclusions and recommendations Conclusions Lag Note: the exercise was performed with a 4-second latency for each voice communication transmission between the controller and the remote pilot. Though the current setup does not allow relying 100% on the exercise results, these being more subjective than quantified: Lag has a negative impact on ATCo workload (delay in acknowledgement), resulting in larger separation, in turn resulting in lower airport capacity and delays of commercial flights. Lag is felt too uncomfortable to have safe and efficient approaches; it should be manageable during initial approach, but not during final approach. Lag is most likely inacceptable for take-off, landing and taxiing phases Horizontal and Vertical Manoeuvrability Impact of the RPA s speed on ATCo workload, airport capacity and commercial traffic flow is a function of the airport category and its traffic distribution over the day. Assuming lag-less communications: An RPA flying similar speed and climb/descent rates as other commercial traffic may be managed as any other traffic (procedures, separation ) whatever the category of airport An RPA flying much slower than other traffic may benefit from tailored trajectories, taking profit of its horizontal and vertical manoeuvrability, and be inserted on a middle-size 50 of 74

51 commercial aerodrome when traffic distributions permits. Indeed, horizontal manoeuvrability may lead to shorter turns, and vertical manoeuvrability to steeper descents Human Factors Though it seems technically and operationally feasible to insert safely RPA on the approach of a middle-size commercial aerodrome, ATCo do not feel totally confident in handling RPA efficiently without impacting the capacity of the airport and smoothness of commercial traffic on arrival. Nevertheless, it could be acceptable to handle an RPA and disturb commercial traffic occasionally for good reasons (degraded operations), not routinely Recommendations EXE-RPAS _Reco1 Continuation : A fix has been found to solve the issue with overlapping voice communications that still remained comprehensible. The ODREA project would recommend repeating part of the exercise and ascertain the conclusions. EXE-RPAS _Reco2 Further studies : Since latency in beyond line of sight communications is an issue for most phases of flight, recommendations would be to: 1. Initiate further work on C3 developments (and standardisation) for gate-to-gate operations 2. Consider more automated RPA flights (benefiting from CDA or Advanced AMAN operations being deployed by SESAR) and for which little communication is required between the ATCo and the Remote Pilot once trajectory exchanged and agreed upon as is the case in some locations today (and when traffic density permits) EXE-RPAS _Reco3 Tailored trajectories : Tailored trajectories for small and middle-size commercial aerodromes, with simplified validation and approval process, should be designed: By the Procedure Design Office and published for the airport, as is the case for VFR procedures today By the RPAS Operator, taking into account constraints and instructions to connect to the final approach path from the Procedure Design Office on the one hand, and the RPA flight performance on the other hand. These tailored trajectories will be published with the flight plan when posted prior to the flight EXE-RPAS _Reco4 ATM cross-knowledge : Finally, RPAS need to be demystified for ATCo. There needs to be more and/or better exchanges between the ATM and the RPAS communities, as well as having them acquainted and trained. The ODREA project would recommend a continuation of the demonstration activities. 6.3 Demonstration Exercise EXE-RPAS Flight Demonstrations Report Exercise Scope The objectives of the exercise were to validate through actual flights: The integration of an RPA (Sagem s Patroller, depicted Figure 12 with RPS depicted Figure 13) into the traffic of mid-size commercial airport (Toulouse-Blagnac), based on tailored trajectories defined by ENAC in order to limit the impact on commercial traffic Procedures for the C2 link loss as well as a major emergency (i.e. engine failure) 51 of 74

52 Automated collision avoidance provided by Sagem s D&A Demonstrator suite. The airborne side, integrated in a pod is depicted Figure 14 Figure 12: EXE-RPAS Demonstration Flights - Sagem's Patroller TM (RPA) Figure 13: EXE-RPAS Demonstration Flights - Sagem's Patroller TM (RPS) 52 of 74

53 Figure 14: EXE-RPAS Demonstration Flights D&A Demonstrator (pod) Conduct of Demonstration Exercise Exercise Preparation Tailored Trajectories Design The predefined tailored trajectories were designed to allow the RPA to: Depart from Muret-Lherm (LFBR) and fly to the designated Toulouse-Blagnac (LFBR) IAF, and come back (linking routes between airports or POGO). Perform an arrival on LFBO and LFBR airports with both wind configurations (north-west or south-east). The PANS-OPS current regulations did not allow application of the standard protection criteria. Hence, alternative solutions used to protect the RPA against the different zones and obstacles were proposed. These solutions have been selected in agreement with DSAC s and Sagem s experts, and were conservative, keeping in mind that all the flights would be done daylight, by Visual Meteorological Conditions (VMC), the ground in sight, and in Visual Flight Rules. The applied design process was the same as the one used for designing a standard IFR procedure, though there is a lack of PANS-OPS criteria to protect RPAS trajectories in accordance with the RPAS navigation performance: Design of trajectories taking into account environmental constraints, ATC operational constraints and flyability of the procedure Overall protection of the flight sector with Minimum Safety Altitudes (MSA) and a specific study of the obstacle assessment under radar vectoring below the minimum radar safety altitudes during the missed approach at LFBO Design of holding patterns Design of specific protection areas around each segment of the trajectories Operational minima determination 53 of 74

54 Figure 15 below depicts the overall protection from the obstacle assessment as well as the tailored trajectories overlaid on a map for the sake of clarity. The original drawing can be found Appendix C. Figure 15: EXE-RPAS Demonstration Flights Overall Protection and Tailored Trajectories Sites Survey A site survey was performed by Sagem spring 2014 in order to assess the electromagnetic and topographic environment (obstacles, terrain ) and verify the inter-visibility between Muret from which the RPA would be operated, Blagnac and Bédeille, making sure the line of sight communications (C2) would not be degraded during the exercise Safety Study A safety study (Airspace / Airport Safety Impact Assessment or EPIS-CA) was led by DNSA, involving all participants as well as air navigation and safety personnel from DGAC. Started Feb-2014, the study was completed Sept This study was conducted through a series of presentations, meetings and conference calls, and 8 iterations of the document exchanged by for review, representing a total effort of approximately 120 person.hours. The study aimed at identifying safety hazards and mitigating those when covering 2 changes to current situation in the concerned airspace: 1. Tailored trajectories for slow flying RPA among commercial traffic 2. Detect & Avoid Exercises in a Temporary Restricted Area The results are summarized in the following table: Risk / Issue Mitigation ATCo Workload Increase Briefing to Controllers < 10 Arrivals/h (LFBO) 54 of 74

55 Risk / Issue Mitigation Use of Experimental Procedures Briefing to Controllers RPA as VFR on Tailored Trajectories Impact on Safety (and Capacity) < 10 Arrivals/h (LFBO) RPA < A400M & A350 < Revenue a/c Loss of Separation Separation vs IFR traffic by ATC Traffic Information to VFR C2 Link Loss Shared C2 Link Loss Procedure + Safety Pilot C2 Link Environmental Assessment Loss of Control (wake vortex) RPA as Light Aircraft + Safety Pilot Collision with Terrain Up to Date Terrain DB and Flights in VMC Unexpected Traffic in Temporary Restricted Area (D&A Exercises) AIP SUP and NOTAM; Traffic Information Information to Local Airfields and Aeroclubs Table 17: EXE-RPAS Demonstration Flights - Safety Study Risk Mitigation AIP-SUP As a result from the Safety Study (see above), an AIP-SUP was published for the creation of the Temporary Restricted Area at Bédeille as depicted Figure 16 below. Figure 16: EXE-RPAS Demonstration Flights - AIP SUP for the Creation of a TRA at Bédeille 55 of 74

56 NOTAM As a result from the Safety Study (see above), a NOTAM was published for the activation of the Temporary Restricted Area at Bédeille as depicted below. Another NOTAM had been published slightly before for the installation of the C2 link antenna on the roof of ENAC s premises, where the demonstration flights team was hosted. Figure 17: EXE-RPAS Demonstration Flights NOTAM for the Activation of a TRA at Bédeille ATCo Briefing Material As a result from the Safety Study (see above), briefing material was put together, distributed and presented to the controllers prior to the exercise. This material consisted of a Temporary Operational Notice and a Powerpoint presentation detailing: Dates and objectives of the exercise The RPAS main characteristics, i.e. flight performance similar to those of a DR400 except climb rate max limited to 500 ft/minute. Flight conditions and flight rules for the exercise Transponder code Map detailing the TRA at Bédeille Commented tailored trajectories charts Management of the simulated failures (C2 link loss and engine failure) Scenarios for the different sorties 56 of 74

57 Information letters As a result from the Safety Study (see above), an information letter was sent to not less than 20 aero-clubs and aerodromes in vicinity of Muret by both postal and electronic mail. The intent was to notify them of the dates of the exercise, and encouraging them to have the NOTAM and AIP-SUP read and taken into account for the safety of both their pilots as well as the ODREA pilots Permit to Fly The Permit to Fly was granted 17-Oct-2014 by the DGAC, allowing the Flight for research, experimental or scientific purposes according to (b) of annex 2 of EC regulation, relying on a series of artefacts including: Manuel d Activités Particulières (MAP) Test program description Payload justification Pilot list and qualification Aircraft (Stemme s S6 Motorglider) flight manual Safety pilot s commercial pilot license (CPL) Questionnaire The same Questionnaire that was used during the Real Time Simulations (EXE-RPAS ) was used to collect feedback from the controllers after each sortie. The form can be found in Appendix B Exercise execution Approach The approach for the flight demonstrations exercise was to use outputs from the real time simulations (EXE-RPAS ) as a basis for flight test detailed scenarios. The demonstrations were hence performed after the associated procedures were defined and validated, and controllers acquainted with both the procedures and the flight performance of the RPA Scenarios Four scenarios were defined to cover the objectives of the exercise: 1. Scenario #1: Nominal procedures including POGO (transit) between Muret-Lherm (LFBR) and Toulouse-Blagnac (LFBO) a) Taxi and departure from LFBR b) POGO between LFBR and LFBO c) Approach and wave off at LFBO (1500 ft AMSL) d) POGO between LFBO and LFBR e) Arrival, landing and taxi at LFBR 2. Scenario #2: Nominal procedures including radar vectoring between Muret-Lherm (LFBR) and Toulouse-Blagnac (LFBO) a) Taxi and departure from LFBR b) Radar vectoring between LFBR and LFBO c) Two approaches and wave offs at LFBO (1500 ft AMSL) d) Radar vectoring between LFBO and LFBR 57 of 74

58 e) Arrival, landing and taxi at LFBR 3. Scenario #3: C2 link loss and engine failure procedures a) Flight from LFBR to LFBO following standard procedures (same as Scenario #1) b) C2 link loss while in POGO c) End of C2 link loss at IAF d) Approach and wave off at LFBO e) Engine failure leading to re-routing towards LFBR f) C2 link loss when arriving at LFBR 4. Scenario #4: Detect & Avoid and, C2 link loss and engine failure procedures a) D&A exercises in TRA b) C2 link loss and engine failure during trip back from TRA All the scenarios were conducted remotely piloted from the remote pilot station (RPS) located at LFBR. Taxi was performed from the remote pilot station using the panoramic tail camera of the Patroller, take-off and approach were performed in automatic mode, and, heading, roll, altitude, speed and waypoint navigation were commanded from the RPS. Only landing was performed manually by the safety pilot on board the RPA Planning The exercise was led from ENAC s premises at Muret-Lherm, where the remote pilot station was located. The activities were undertaken during 3 weeks in fall 2014 as follows: Week Activities W43 RPAS (RPA, RPS and antennas) deployment at LFBR Briefing with controllers from both LFBR and LFBO each and every day to explain procedures and scenarios RPAS verification flights W44 7 sorties performed covering Scenarios #1, #2, #3 and #4 W45 1 sortie performed covering Scenario #2 Demonstration Day (6-Nov-2014): o 2 sorties covering Scenario #1 and Scenario # Deviation from the planned activities The following deviations from the Demonstration Plan [1] have been reported: EXE-RPAS _Dev1 No Engine Failure exercise : Engine failure exercises were not completed on request from the controllers who would not re-route or delay commercial traffic for the sake of the demonstrations. 58 of 74

59 6.3.3 Exercise Results Summary of Exercise Results A total of 10 sorties were performed in the frame of the exercise covering the 4 scenarios defined, among which 4 sorties were dedicated to D&A. Nevertheless, engine failure exercises were not completed on request from the controllers who would not re-route or delay commercial traffic for the sake of the demonstrations Sorties The following table summarizes the Demonstration Flights results obtained after analysis of recordings and debriefing with the controllers in charge of the sorties. Nominal Situation (traffic density at LFBO < 10 mvt/h) Results and Feedbacks The RPA was capable of following the tailored trajectories as well as the radar vectoring without any problem thanks to its navigation accuracy and C2 link low latency The RPA visibility by other aircraft was qualified appropriate Some issues with phraseology during the first sortie were reported, leading to a change of remote pilot for the next sorties Degraded The C2 link loss procedure was completed twice in LFBR, and performed as expected The Engine failure procedure was not performed at all since not authorized by the ATCo despite briefings due to too many aircraft in the vicinity of LFBR. Detect & Avoid Both slow beam and head on encounters were demonstrated against ENAC s BE58 or TB20 aircraft as intruder Cooperative (TAS) and non-cooperative (IR) tracking and data fusion enabled automatic collision avoidance 0.7 to 1.2 km away from the intruder as depicted Figure 18 below (slow beam encounter left, head on encounter right). Some false IR tracks reported by the D&A Demonstrator resulting in nuisance alerts and increase in remote pilot s workload for monitoring whether real and to be associated with the cooperative sensor (TAS) or not. Table 18: EXE-RPAS Demonstration Flights - Sorties Results Summary 59 of 74

60 Figure 18: EXE-RPAS Demonstration Flights D&A Avoidance Manoeuvres Questionnaires The following table summarizes the Demonstration Flights results obtained through analysis of feedback through the questionnaire from the controllers having performed the exercise. Only 5 questionnaires were filled and returned. Other feedback was provided orally during debriefs after the sorties, and are taken into account in previous section. Feedback Comparison with light aircraft Impact of lag leading to clearances updates or strategy change Difficulty to insert an RPA in the approach sequence Impact on safety Answer Ratio Yes 100% No (80%) No (75%) No (80%) Comments RPA speed too low compared to Blagnac s traffic A VFR incursion into the TRA occurred during the D&A exercise C2 link loss procedure? No feedback in the questionnaire Possible enhancements for future experimentations N/A Use a faster RPA Have more experienced remote pilots regarding radio communications Table 19: EXE-RPAS Demonstration Flights - Questionnaire Results Summary Results per KPA 60 of 74

61 The identified KPA were: Safety: No impact on manned traffic and populations Capacity: No impact on manned traffic Human Factors: Acceptability by Controllers As can be read in Table 18 and Table 19 above: Safety: No separation infringements were observed during the sorties, and all controllers felt the situation safe during the approach sequence. Unfortunately, though everything had been set in place to conduct the D&A exercises safely in the TRA (SUP-AIP, NOTAM, Information Letters ), a VFR incursion occurred during the sortie. Capacity: No impact on capacity was reported, the sorties having been coordinated every morning with the controllers. The prioritisation of commercial traffic upon the RPA was respected. Human Factors: Most controllers (75%) had no difficulty in managing the slow flying RPA and having it integrated in the approach sequence Results impacting regulation and standardisation initiatives As reported by the controllers, fluency with the aeronautical terminology is key. Regulation should be set in place in terms of remote pilot training, and make sure they are fluent with commercial aviation terminology. The ODREA project acknowledges, nevertheless, work on remote pilot licensing has been initiated within several working groups, such as EUROCAE WG73, RTCA SC228 and JARUS Unexpected Behaviours/Results EXE-RPAS _Unex1 Incursion in TRA : even though everything had been set in place to conduct the D&A exercises safely in the TRA (SUP-AIP, NOTAM, Information Letters ), a VFR incursion occurred during the sortie. That VFR flight hadn t reported to the controller who couldn t provide traffic information as he did on other occasions. It is suspected, curiosity triggered by the drone experimentation notifications (NOTAM, Information Letters ) led to the situation. The incursion was managed by the pilots participating to the ODREA exercise and the controller, with no further impact on the sortie Quality of Demonstration Results The high quality of demonstration results was provided by use of actual assets including an RPA representative of a MALE, remotely piloted from a remote pilot station and integrated into nonsegregated airspace. Also, the D&A exercises were performed using a complete D&A suite comprising sensors and embedded software, enabling downlinked data to the remote pilot and automatic manoeuvre execution. Moreover, the D&A exercises were performed against a BE-58 and a TB-20 aircraft flown by ENAC s pilots Significance of Demonstration Results Statistical significance of the demonstration results can be assumed due to the number of sorties (more than twice planned initially) considered in the analysis. These were spread over more than a week, hence in different traffic and weather (typically wind) conditions. Operational significance of the demonstration results can be assumed due to the representativeness of scenarios on the one hand (nominal and degraded approaches on a mid-size commercial airport, 61 of 74

62 D&A encounters geometries), and to the actual traffic conditions on the other hand. The following table shows the traffic and handling of the RPA (F-WUAV) during the 30-Oct-2014 sortie for integration into LFBO. Data was extracted from radar records at Toulouse-Blagnac. Time Conditions / Event 10:27 F-WUAV Take-off from LFBR; 4 aircraft in take-off circuit 10:37 Closing DAH1044, 5000 ft vertical, 0.3 NM lateral 10:53 F-WUAV Wave-off at LFBO 10:55 Closing AFR114EK, 2000 ft vertical, 3 NM lateral 10:57 F-WUAV Wave-off at LFBO after 1 holding pattern 11:01 Closing FGTQB, 1200 ft vertical, 3 NM lateral 11:02 F-WUAV Wave-off at LFBO after 2 holding patterns 11:04 Closing AFR119XR, 8100 ft vertical, 0.8 NM lateral 11:26 Closing F-JRHT, 1000 ft vertical, 0.5 NM lateral 11:29 F-WUAV Landing at LFBR after 4 holding patterns; 4 aircraft in take-off circuit Table 20: EXE-RPAS Demonstration Flights Sorties Traffic Conditions (extract) Conclusions and recommendations Conclusions Most if not all (only the engine failure procedure was not demonstrated) objectives were fulfilled successfully. This was due to the combination of: Industry ANSP collaboration: The tailored trajectories and procedures definitions resulted of a close collaboration between industry providing information on the capabilities of the RPAS (incl. the flight performance characteristics of the RPA) and the ANSP providing constraints but capabilities as well of current ATM. Open discussions during the briefings with the controllers prior to the exercise, and prior to the sorties, aided fulfilling its objectives Early and positive involvement of the Authorities: The Safety Assessment (EPIS-CA) took some time, but the open discussions made the iterative process run smoothly. The requested artefacts were delivered and distributed in time for the exercise to be undertaken as planned Use of the Patroller in OPV mode: The presence of a safety pilot on-board the RPA facilitated the demonstration flights. Though aware that the RPA was remotely piloted miles away, the controllers felt more confident by his presence mitigating the absence of certified D&A solution RPAS demystification: As can be read Table 18 and Table 19, most controllers (75%) were able to handle the RPA within Toulouse-Blagnac s commercial traffic. Though flying more slowly, all controllers assimilate the RPA to a light manned aircraft, its behaviour, provided proper ATC voice communications by the remote pilot, being the same. 62 of 74

63 Recommendations EXE-RPAS _Reco1 Demonstration Environment Fit : The ODREA project may have been a bit optimistic in choosing Toulouse-Blagnac as main test site for the exercise. The commercial traffic density did not allow validating the engine failure procedure as expected. A better match between the demonstration objectives and the trial environment would be recommended. EXE-RPAS _Reco2 ATM cross-knowledge : More experimentation at different locations in nominal conditions should be conducted in order to increase knowledge among the different ATM stakeholders and airspace users. EXE-RPAS _Reco3 Minimum requirements : More joint activities between industry and ATC/ANSP, including workshops and real time simulations prior to demonstration flights, should be undertaken in order to identify what is strictly necessary to conduct IFR flights routinely. This would cover required equipage (minimum equipment list) and its performance figures, acceptable voice communication latency (lag) for the different flight phases, and, acceptable and affordable procedures for both nominal and non-nominal conditions EXE-RPAS _Reco4 Detect & Avoid : On top of work on sensor miniaturisation, the algorithms should be more extensively validated through simulations involving different traffic categories and have their design refined from feedback from the simulations. The traffic avoidance strategy, timelines and manoeuvres would be refined accordingly. Also, compatibility with the future ACAS X should be assessed. 63 of 74

64 7 Summary of the Communication Activities 7.1 Planned Activities The following table lists the planned communication activities undertaken within the project: Activity Responsible Date ODREA Website: ENAC / DSNA KOM Creation of multimedia contents (videos, photos) ENAC / DSNA N/A Participation to SESAR JU Workshops All Feb-2015 Press releases: Air & Cosmos www, e-press Participation to International Events: Final Event World ATM Congress 2014 (Madrid, Spain) AUVSI 2014 (Orlando, USA) UVS RPAS 2014 (Brussels, Belgium) AETOS Conference (Merignac, France) During the event, a round table addressed the What s Next, inviting the attendees to express themselves on gaps and needs to fulfil those. The round table summary can be found Appendix D. Sagem Sagem / ENAC ENAC / DSNA RCF / Sagem RCF / Sagem RCF / Sagem All Nov-2014 Nov-2014 Mar-2014 May-2014 Jun-2014 Sept-2014 Mar-2015 Table 21: Communication Activities Planned Activities 7.2 Additional Activities The following table lists the additional communication activities undertaken within the project: Activity Responsible Date Participation to International Events: ICS 2014 (Toulouse, France) World ATM Congress 2015 (Madrid, Spain) ICAO RPAS Symposium (Montreal, Canada) EUROCAE General Assembly & Symposium (Rome, Italy) RCF RCF / ENAC ENAC ENAC Nov-2014 Mar-2015 Mar-2015 Apr-2015 Table 22: Communication Activities Additional Activities 64 of 74

65 8 Next Steps The ODREA demonstrations, based on Fast Time Simulations (EXE-RPAS ), Real Time Simulations (EXE-RPAS ) and Demonstrations Flights (EXE-RPAS ), provided fruitful results which are relevant for further steps in integrating RPAS in non-segregated airspace: Demonstration of the technical and operational feasibility of integrating RPA into the traffic of a mid-size commercial airport, taking benefit of tailored trajectories and pre-defined emergency procedures Demonstration of the RPAS capabilities covering almost every phases of flight, the RPA being remotely piloted Initial assessment of the impact of latency (lag) on voice communications during the approach phase Experience and data collected by the project should serve in standardization activities concerning procedures for operating in nominal and degraded modes, Detect & Avoid as well as Communication systems and infrastructures. Overall, the ODREA project demonstrated the benefits of having ANSP and Industry being involved altogether since the early stages of a demonstration project. Nevertheless, the ODREA project would recommend: Need for standardisation on D&A Need for continuation of the exercises addressing D&A, communication between the controllers and the remote pilot, degraded modes as well as landing and taxiing Need for continuation of the exercises to foster exchanges between all ATM communities and keep demystifying RPAS Need for further studies and joint activities addressing: C3 developments and SESAR Concepts for RPAS Design of tailored trajectories including the definition of standard protection criteria Minimum requirements for RPAS routine IFR flights This was confirmed during the round table proposed during the ODREA Final Event, discussions having been raised around the following topics: Need for high level requirements and concepts of operations Need to define safety figures for certification Need for studies on data exchange (especially related to trajectories) Need for requirements on C2 data link, incl. quality of service as well as transmission schemes and supporting infrastructure 65 of 74

66 9 References 9.1 Applicable Documents N/A. 9.2 Reference Documents [1] ODREA Demonstration Plan Ed , 06-Mar of 74

67 Appendix A Tailored Trajectories Charts Figure 19: Tailored Trajectories Charts - POGO between LFBR and LFBO 67 of 74

68 Figure 20: Tailored Trajectories Charts Approach RWY30 at LFBR 68 of 74

69 Appendix B Questionnaire to Controllers Questionnaire contrôleur Date Identifiant 1- Avez-vous eu l'impression que le comportement du RPAS a été similaire à celui d'un aéronef léger piloté lors des différentes phases de vol? Oui Non Faites le commentaire de votre choix ici : Votre réponse est «non», aussi quels éléments ont été différents par rapport au comportement d un avion léger? Veuillez écrire votre réponse ici : 2- Avez-vous ressenti un temps de latence entre le moment où vous avez transmis les clairances et le moment où le RPAS a effectué la manœuvre? Oui Non Faites le commentaire de votre choix ici : Votre réponse est «oui», alors cela a-t-il entraîné des amendements de clairance ou des changements de stratégie par rapport à la situation attendue? Oui Non Faites le commentaire de votre choix ici : 3- Avez-vous eu des difficultés pour insérer le RPAS dans les séquences de trafic d'approche ou d'aérodrome? Oui Non Faites le commentaire de votre choix ici : Votre réponse est "oui", alors quels éléments ont rendu difficiles l insertion du RPAS? Veuillez écrire votre réponse ici : 69 of 74

70 4- Est-ce que les temps de transferts du RPAS entre la tour de contrôle et l'approche, voir d autres organismes de contrôle adjacents, ont été plus longs que par rapport à un aéronef piloté? Oui Non Faites le commentaire de votre choix ici : Votre réponse est «oui», aussi est-ce que ce laps de temps supplémentaire a eu pour conséquence un impact sur la sécurité? Oui Non Faites le commentaire de votre choix ici : 5- Est-ce que la sécurité du trafic a été assurée? Oui Non Faites le commentaire de votre choix ici : Votre réponse est «non», quels éléments ont alors altéré le niveau de sécurité du trafic? Veuillez écrire votre réponse ici : 6- Les procédures d'urgence vous ont elles paru adaptées? Oui Non Faites le commentaire de votre choix ici : Votre réponse est «non», aussi quelles modifications souhaiteriez-vous que l on mette en œuvre pour qu elles soient plus efficaces? Veuillez écrire votre réponse ici : 7- Si vous deviez renouveler ce type d'expérimentation, quelles améliorations pourrait-on apporter pour insérer les RPAS dans vos espaces et sur votre aérodrome? Veuillez écrire votre réponse ici : 70 of 74

71 Appendix C Overall Protection and Tailored Trajectories Figure 21: Overall Protection and Tailored Trajectories Original Drawing 71 of 74

RPAS Integration in the Airspace SESAR JU demonstration activities Catherine Ronflé-Nadaud

RPAS Integration in the Airspace SESAR JU demonstration activities Catherine Ronflé-Nadaud RPAS Integration in the Airspace SESAR JU demonstration activities Catherine Ronflé-Nadaud October 2014 UAV Program / C.Ronflé-Nadaud 1 UAV Program RPAS integration in the Airspace Unmanned Aircraft Systems

More information

COLLISION AVOIDANCE FOR RPAS

COLLISION AVOIDANCE FOR RPAS COLLISION AVOIDANCE FOR RPAS Johan Pellebergs, Saab Aeronautics ICAS workshop, September 2017 This document and the information contained herein is the property of Saab AB and must not be used, disclosed

More information

Real-time Simulations to Evaluate the RPAS Integration in Shared Airspace

Real-time Simulations to Evaluate the RPAS Integration in Shared Airspace Real-time Simulations to Evaluate the RPAS Integration in Shared Airspace (WP-E project ERAINT) E. Pastor M. Pérez-Batlle P. Royo R. Cuadrado C. Barrado 4 th SESAR Innovation Days Universitat Politècnica

More information

SESAR RPAS Demonstration projects Progress and initial findings. Célia Alves Rodrigues, SESAR Joint Undertaking

SESAR RPAS Demonstration projects Progress and initial findings. Célia Alves Rodrigues, SESAR Joint Undertaking SESAR RPAS Demonstration projects Progress and initial findings Célia Alves Rodrigues, SESAR Joint Undertaking Brussels - December 4 th 2014 Disclaimer / Acknowledgements Thank you to RPAS demos Project

More information

SESAR work on RPAS. Status and results 10/12/2015

SESAR work on RPAS. Status and results 10/12/2015 SESAR work on RPAS Status and results 10/12/2015 SESAR JU work on RPAS In-line with the European Vision; RPAS Definition Phase; EU ATM Master Plan 2015; SESAR 2020 Programme; Link to SES framework; RPAS

More information

REGULATION No. 10/2011 ON APPROVAL OF FLIGHT PROCEDURES INCLUDING SID-s AND STAR-s. Article 1 Scope of Application

REGULATION No. 10/2011 ON APPROVAL OF FLIGHT PROCEDURES INCLUDING SID-s AND STAR-s. Article 1 Scope of Application Republika e Kosovës Republika Kosovo Republic of Kosovo Autoriteti i Aviacionit Civil i Kosovës Autoritet Civilnog Vazduhoplovstva Kosova Civil Aviation Authority of Kosovo Director General of Civil Aviation

More information

USE OF RADAR IN THE APPROACH CONTROL SERVICE

USE OF RADAR IN THE APPROACH CONTROL SERVICE USE OF RADAR IN THE APPROACH CONTROL SERVICE 1. Introduction The indications presented on the ATS surveillance system named radar may be used to perform the aerodrome, approach and en-route control service:

More information

New issues raised on collision avoidance by the introduction of remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) in the ATM system

New issues raised on collision avoidance by the introduction of remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) in the ATM system New issues raised on collision avoidance by the introduction of remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) in the ATM system Jean-Marc Loscos DSNA expert on collision avoidance and airborne surveillance EIWAC 2013

More information

Contextual note SESAR Solution description form for deployment planning

Contextual note SESAR Solution description form for deployment planning Purpose: Release 5 SESAR Solution #13 Contextual note SESAR Solution description form for deployment planning This contextual note introduces a SESAR Solution (for which maturity has been assessed as sufficient

More information

SESAR RPAS Definition Phase Results & Way Forward. Denis Koehl Senior Advisor SESAR Joint Undertaking

SESAR RPAS Definition Phase Results & Way Forward. Denis Koehl Senior Advisor SESAR Joint Undertaking SESAR RPAS Definition Phase Results & Way Forward Denis Koehl Senior Advisor SESAR Joint Undertaking Brussels - December 2 nd 2014 Content The Rationale The EC Mandate Requirements & Challenges SESAR RPAS

More information

RNP AR APCH Approvals: An Operator s Perspective

RNP AR APCH Approvals: An Operator s Perspective RNP AR APCH Approvals: An Operator s Perspective Presented to: ICAO Introduction to Performance Based Navigation Seminar The statements contained herein are based on good faith assumptions and provided

More information

Next Generation Airspace Developments: Key Operational Trends and Enablers

Next Generation Airspace Developments: Key Operational Trends and Enablers Next Generation Airspace Developments: Key Operational Trends and Enablers ICNS 2013, Day 1 Plenary Nikos Fistas EUROCONTROL Herdon, VA, 23/04/13 Agenda Key goals of future European ATM system 4D Trajectory

More information

PBN and airspace concept

PBN and airspace concept PBN and airspace concept 07 10 April 2015 Global Concepts Global ATM Operational Concept Provides the ICAO vision of seamless, global ATM system Endorsed by AN Conf 11 Aircraft operate as close as possible

More information

ACAS on VLJs and LJs Assessment of safety Level (AVAL) Outcomes of the AVAL study (presented by Thierry Arino, Egis Avia)

ACAS on VLJs and LJs Assessment of safety Level (AVAL) Outcomes of the AVAL study (presented by Thierry Arino, Egis Avia) ACAS on VLJs and LJs Assessment of safety Level (AVAL) Outcomes of the AVAL study (presented by Thierry Arino, Egis Avia) Slide 1 Presentation content Introduction Background on Airborne Collision Avoidance

More information

Learning Objectives. By the end of this presentation you should understand:

Learning Objectives. By the end of this presentation you should understand: Designing Routes 1 Learning Objectives By the end of this presentation you should understand: Benefits of RNAV Considerations when designing airspace routes The basic principles behind route spacing The

More information

EUROPEAN COMMISSION DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR MOBILITY AND TRANSPORT

EUROPEAN COMMISSION DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR MOBILITY AND TRANSPORT EUROPEAN COMMISSION DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR MOBILITY AND TRANSPORT DIRECTORATE E - Air Transport E.2 - Single sky & modernisation of air traffic control Brussels, 6 April 2011 MOVE E2/EMM D(2011) 1. TITLE

More information

Flying SESAR from the RPAS Perspective. Robin GARRITY, SESAR JU ATM Expert Third SESAR Innovation Days, Stockholm, 26 th to 28 th November 2013

Flying SESAR from the RPAS Perspective. Robin GARRITY, SESAR JU ATM Expert Third SESAR Innovation Days, Stockholm, 26 th to 28 th November 2013 Flying SESAR from the RPAS Perspective Robin GARRITY, SESAR JU ATM Expert Third SESAR Innovation Days, Stockholm, 26 th to 28 th November 2013 Contents Setting the scene Selected operational issues SESAR

More information

RPAS integration, French experimentation. DSAE: Colonel Jean-Patrick BORJA DIRCAM : Lieutenant-colonel Nicolas MEU

RPAS integration, French experimentation. DSAE: Colonel Jean-Patrick BORJA DIRCAM : Lieutenant-colonel Nicolas MEU RPAS integration, French experimentation DSAE: Colonel Jean-Patrick BORJA DIRCAM : Lieutenant-colonel Nicolas MEU Table of contents CONTEXT OBJECTIVES ORGANISATION OF EXPERIMENTATION INTERIM REPORT CONTEXT

More information

FLIGHT OPERATIONS PANEL (FLTOPSP)

FLIGHT OPERATIONS PANEL (FLTOPSP) International Civil Aviation Organization FLTOPSP/1-WP/3 7/10/14 WORKING PAPER FLIGHT OPERATIONS PANEL (FLTOPSP) FIRST MEETING Montréal, 27 to 31 October 2014 Agenda Item 4: Active work programme items

More information

IRISH AVIATION AUTHORITY DUBLIN POINT MERGE. Presented by James O Sullivan PANS-OPS & AIRSPACE INSPECTOR Irish Aviation Authority

IRISH AVIATION AUTHORITY DUBLIN POINT MERGE. Presented by James O Sullivan PANS-OPS & AIRSPACE INSPECTOR Irish Aviation Authority IRISH AVIATION AUTHORITY DUBLIN POINT MERGE Presented by James O Sullivan PANS-OPS & AIRSPACE INSPECTOR Irish Aviation Authority 2012 Holding Holding Before Point Merge No Pilot anticipation of distance

More information

AGENDA INTRODUCTION & PERSPECTIVE RPAS ACC. REQUIREMENTS EXTRACTION RPAS MALE HALE ACCOMMODATION RPAS CONTINGENCIES CONCLUSION

AGENDA INTRODUCTION & PERSPECTIVE RPAS ACC. REQUIREMENTS EXTRACTION RPAS MALE HALE ACCOMMODATION RPAS CONTINGENCIES CONCLUSION AGENDA INTRODUCTION & PERSPECTIVE RPAS ACC. REQUIREMENTS EXTRACTION RPAS MALE HALE ACCOMMODATION RPAS CONTINGENCIES CONCLUSION PRINCIPLES FOR RPAS ATI RPAS integration without significant impact on other

More information

AIR LAW AND ATC PROCEDURES

AIR LAW AND ATC PROCEDURES 1 The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) establishes: A standards and recommended international practices for contracting member states. B aeronautical standards adopted by all states. C

More information

RPAS INTEGRATION INTO EU AIRSPACE. INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE On CIVIL RPAS OPERATIONS

RPAS INTEGRATION INTO EU AIRSPACE. INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE On CIVIL RPAS OPERATIONS RPAS INTEGRATION INTO EU AIRSPACE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE On CIVIL RPAS OPERATIONS Experimental flights and demonstration activities under IT-CAA permit to flight of the HERO VTOL-RPAS and application

More information

Contextual note SESAR Solution description form for deployment planning

Contextual note SESAR Solution description form for deployment planning Purpose: Release 5 SESAR Solution ID #12 Contextual note SESAR Solution description form for deployment planning This contextual note introduces a SESAR Solution (for which maturity has been assessed as

More information

Follow up to the implementation of safety and air navigation regional priorities XMAN: A CONCEPT TAKING ADVANTAGE OF ATFCM CROSS-BORDER EXCHANGES

Follow up to the implementation of safety and air navigation regional priorities XMAN: A CONCEPT TAKING ADVANTAGE OF ATFCM CROSS-BORDER EXCHANGES RAAC/15-WP/28 International Civil Aviation Organization 04/12/17 ICAO South American Regional Office Fifteenth Meeting of the Civil Aviation Authorities of the SAM Region (RAAC/15) (Asuncion, Paraguay,

More information

TANZANIA CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY AIR NAVIGATION SERVICES INSPECTORATE. Title: CONSTRUCTION OF VISUAL AND INSTRUMENT FLIGHT PROCEDURES

TANZANIA CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY AIR NAVIGATION SERVICES INSPECTORATE. Title: CONSTRUCTION OF VISUAL AND INSTRUMENT FLIGHT PROCEDURES Page 1 of 8 1. PURPOSE 1.1. This Advisory Circular provides guidance to personnel involved in construction of instrument and visual flight procedures for publication in the Aeronautical Information Publication.

More information

ATSAW. (Airborne Traffic Situational Awareness) Presented by Laurent VIDAL - Surveillance systems manager Support to sales & programs

ATSAW. (Airborne Traffic Situational Awareness) Presented by Laurent VIDAL - Surveillance systems manager Support to sales & programs ATSAW (Airborne Traffic Situational Awareness) Presented by Laurent VIDAL - Surveillance systems manager Support to sales & programs CONTENTS 1 2 3 INTRODUCTION ATSAW COCKPIT INTERFACE ATSAW OPERATION

More information

SESAR Solutions. Display Options

SESAR Solutions. Display Options SESAR Solutions Outputs from the SESAR Programme R&I activities which relate to an Operational Improvement (OI) step or a small group of OI steps and its/their associated enablers, which have been designed,

More information

International Civil Aviation Organization. Satellite spectrum to support the safe operation of Unmanned Aircraft Systems

International Civil Aviation Organization. Satellite spectrum to support the safe operation of Unmanned Aircraft Systems International Civil Aviation Organization Satellite spectrum to support the safe operation of Unmanned Aircraft Systems Loftur Jónasson, Air Navigation Bureau, ICAO 23 May 2012 Convention on International

More information

LFBO / Toulouse-Blagnac / TLS

LFBO / Toulouse-Blagnac / TLS This page is intended to draw commercial and private pilots attention to the aeronautical context and main threats related to an aerodrome. They have been identified in a collaborative way by the main

More information

IFR SEPARATION USING RADAR

IFR SEPARATION USING RADAR IFR SEPARATION USING RADAR 1. Introduction When flying IFR inside controlled airspace, air traffic controllers either providing a service to an aircraft under their control or to another controller s traffic,

More information

Workshop. SESAR 2020 Concept. A Brief View of the Business Trajectory

Workshop. SESAR 2020 Concept. A Brief View of the Business Trajectory SESAR 2020 Concept A Brief View of the Business Trajectory 1 The Presentation SESAR Concept: Capability Levels Key Themes: Paradigm change Business Trajectory Issues Conclusion 2 ATM Capability Levels

More information

PBN AIRSPACE CONCEPT WORKSHOP. SIDs/STARs/HOLDS. Continuous Descent Operations (CDO) ICAO Doc 9931

PBN AIRSPACE CONCEPT WORKSHOP. SIDs/STARs/HOLDS. Continuous Descent Operations (CDO) ICAO Doc 9931 International Civil Aviation Organization PBN AIRSPACE CONCEPT WORKSHOP SIDs/STARs/HOLDS Continuous Descent Operations (CDO) ICAO Doc 9931 Design in context Methodology STEPS TFC Where does the traffic

More information

TWELFTH AIR NAVIGATION CONFERENCE DRAFT REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON AGENDA ITEM 4

TWELFTH AIR NAVIGATION CONFERENCE DRAFT REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON AGENDA ITEM 4 26/11/12 TWELFTH AIR NAVIGATION CONFERENCE Montréal, 19 to 30 November 2012 DRAFT REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON AGENDA ITEM 4 The attached draft report on Agenda Item 4 is presented for approval by the Committee

More information

French DSNA approach to CNS rationalization & evolution

French DSNA approach to CNS rationalization & evolution French DSNA approach to CNS rationalization & evolution Jean-Marc LOSCOS Senior expert on European Programs DSNA Toulouse CONTEXT: EUROPEAN ATM MASTER PLAN 2015 AND SINGLE EUROPEAN SKY (SES) The Single

More information

CEPT Workshop on Spectrum for Drones / UAS

CEPT Workshop on Spectrum for Drones / UAS CEPT Workshop on Spectrum for Drones / UAS Current EUROCONTROL work programme on Drones Raffi KHATCHERIAN Head of International Spectrum Management 29 30 May 2018 UAS @ EUROCONTROL Contribution to Research

More information

Air traffic services (ATS) datalink using Iris Precursor. Contextual note SESAR Solution description form for deployment planning

Air traffic services (ATS) datalink using Iris Precursor. Contextual note SESAR Solution description form for deployment planning Purpose: Release 5 SESAR Solution ID #109 Contextual note SESAR Solution description form for deployment planning This contextual note introduces a SESAR Solution with a summary of the results stemming

More information

Stepwise Integration of UAS into the ATM System

Stepwise Integration of UAS into the ATM System DLR.de Chart 1 Stepwise Integration of UAS into the ATM System Dr. Bernd Korn DLR Institute of Flight Guidance DLR.de Chart 2 UAS integration: All vehicles in all airspace DLR.de Chart 3 Equivalent UAS

More information

DEMORPAS Project. Final Dissemination Forum. 10th March 2016, World ATM Congress, Madrid

DEMORPAS Project. Final Dissemination Forum. 10th March 2016, World ATM Congress, Madrid DEMORPAS Project Final Dissemination Forum 10th March 2016, World ATM Congress, Madrid Workshop Contents 1. Introduction to DEMORPAS Project 2. Operational environment 3. Exercises performed 4. Analysis

More information

INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS ASSOCIATIONS. Agenda Item: B.5.12 IFATCA 09 WP No. 94

INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS ASSOCIATIONS. Agenda Item: B.5.12 IFATCA 09 WP No. 94 INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS ASSOCIATIONS 48 th ANNUAL CONFERENCE - Dubrovnik, 20 th to 24 th April 2009 Agenda Item: B.5.12 IFATCA 09 WP No. 94 Study Go Around Procedures When on

More information

SOUTH AFRICA PBN NEAR TERM IMPLEMENTATION PLAN PROJECT

SOUTH AFRICA PBN NEAR TERM IMPLEMENTATION PLAN PROJECT PRE-PLANNING PHASE Nomination of the State Focal Point of Contact Appointment of the South Africa PBN Project Manager and Team Define the goals and objectives of Project Define the Terms of Reference for

More information

Official Journal of the European Union L 186/27

Official Journal of the European Union L 186/27 7.7.2006 Official Journal of the European Union L 186/27 COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1032/2006 of 6 July 2006 laying down requirements for automatic systems for the exchange of flight data for the purpose

More information

CHAPTER 5 SEPARATION METHODS AND MINIMA

CHAPTER 5 SEPARATION METHODS AND MINIMA CHAPTER 5 SEPARATION METHODS AND MINIMA 5.1 Provision for the separation of controlled traffic 5.1.1 Vertical or horizontal separation shall be provided: a) between IFR flights in Class D and E airspaces

More information

CASCADE OPERATIONAL FOCUS GROUP (OFG)

CASCADE OPERATIONAL FOCUS GROUP (OFG) CASCADE OPERATIONAL FOCUS GROUP (OFG) Use of ADS-B for Enhanced Traffic Situational Awareness by Flight Crew During Flight Operations Airborne Surveillance (ATSA-AIRB) 1. INTRODUCTION TO ATSA-AIRB In today

More information

Future Automation Scenarios

Future Automation Scenarios Future Automation Scenarios Francesca Lucchi University of Bologna Madrid, 05 th March 2018 AUTOPACE Project Close-Out Meeting. 27th of March, 2018, Brussels 1 Future Automation Scenarios: Introduction

More information

RPAS - Standardisation activities

RPAS - Standardisation activities RPAS - Standardisation activities ICAO Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems Symposium 23-25 March 2015, Montreal Alexander Engel, EUROCAE About EUROCAE Relevant EUROCAE Activities 2 What is EUROCAE? EUROCAE

More information

Contents. Subpart A General 91.1 Purpose... 7

Contents. Subpart A General 91.1 Purpose... 7 Contents Rule objective... 3 Extent of consultation... 3 Summary of comments... 4 Examination of comments... 6 Insertion of Amendments... 6 Effective date of rule... 6 Availability of rules... 6 Part 91

More information

Atlantic Interoperability Initiative to Reduce Emissions AIRE

Atlantic Interoperability Initiative to Reduce Emissions AIRE ICAO Colloquium on Aviation and Climate Change ICAO ICAO Colloquium Colloquium on Aviation Aviation and and Climate Climate Change Change Atlantic Interoperability Initiative to Reduce Emissions AIRE Célia

More information

IAC 2011 Cape Town, October th

IAC 2011 Cape Town, October th Cape Town, October 05 05 th Project Partners External Supporters and Sponsors The Problem The Solution Overview S 2 BAS Concept of Operations Architecture Possible Applications Stakeholders Flight Phases

More information

EASA NPA on SERA Part ENAV Response sheet. GENERAL COMMENTS ON NPA PACKAGE Note: Specific comments are provided after the General Comments

EASA NPA on SERA Part ENAV Response sheet. GENERAL COMMENTS ON NPA PACKAGE Note: Specific comments are provided after the General Comments EASA NPA on SERA Part ENAV Response sheet GENERAL COMMENTS ON NPA PACKAGE te: Specific comments are provided after the General Comments 1 SERA Parts C and D ENAV still misses clarity on the whole scope

More information

ASPASIA Project. ASPASIA Overall Summary. ASPASIA Project

ASPASIA Project. ASPASIA Overall Summary. ASPASIA Project ASPASIA Project ASPASIA Overall Summary ASPASIA Project ASPASIA Project ASPASIA (Aeronautical Surveillance and Planning by Advanced ) is an international project co-funded by the European Commission within

More information

IFR SEPARATION WITHOUT RADAR

IFR SEPARATION WITHOUT RADAR 1. Introduction IFR SEPARATION WITHOUT RADAR When flying IFR inside controlled airspace, air traffic controllers either providing a service to an aircraft under their control or to another controller s

More information

GENERAL REPORT. Reduced Lateral Separation Minima RLatSM Phase 2. RLatSM Phase 3

GENERAL REPORT. Reduced Lateral Separation Minima RLatSM Phase 2. RLatSM Phase 3 IBAC TECHNICAL REPORT SUMMARY Subject: NAT Operations and Air Traffic Management Meeting: North Atlantic (NAT) Procedures and Operations Group Meeting 2 Reported by Tom Young POG2 took place at the ICAO

More information

Operational implementation of new ATM automated systems and integration of the existing systems ADS-B IMPLEMENTATION IN GUYANA. (Presented by Guyana)

Operational implementation of new ATM automated systems and integration of the existing systems ADS-B IMPLEMENTATION IN GUYANA. (Presented by Guyana) International Civil Aviation Organization SAM/IG/22-IP/19 South American Regional Office 12/11/2018 Twenty Second Workshop/Meeting of the SAM Implementation Group (SAM/IG/22) - Regional Project RLA/06/901

More information

Design Airspace (Routes, Approaches and Holds) Module 11 Activity 7. European Airspace Concept Workshops for PBN Implementation

Design Airspace (Routes, Approaches and Holds) Module 11 Activity 7. European Airspace Concept Workshops for PBN Implementation Design Airspace (Routes, Approaches and Holds) Module 11 Activity 7 European Airspace Concept Workshops for PBN Implementation Design in Context TFC Where does the traffic come from? And when? RWY Which

More information

LFPG / Paris-Charles de Gaulle / CDG

LFPG / Paris-Charles de Gaulle / CDG This page is intended to draw commercial and private pilots attention to the aeronautical context and main threats related to an aerodrome. They have been identified in a collaborative way by the main

More information

DMT Report. Overview for Step 1. Maturity Assessment Issue date: (OFA view) 28/01/2015

DMT Report. Overview for Step 1. Maturity Assessment Issue date: (OFA view) 28/01/2015 MAT Report References: Maturity Assessment Issue date: (OFA view) Integrated roadmap 26/11/2014 Dataset 13 - Baseline 5.0 DMT Report 26/01/2015 PIRM Result 19/09/2014 Updated Assessment in 2014 (Step1)

More information

Contextual note SESAR Solution description form for deployment planning

Contextual note SESAR Solution description form for deployment planning Purpose: Release 4 SESAR Solution #51 Contextual note SESAR Solution description form for deployment planning This contextual note introduces a SESAR Solution (for which maturity has been assessed as sufficient

More information

NZQA registered unit standard version 2 Page 1 of 9. Demonstrate flying skills for an airline transport pilot licence (aeroplane)

NZQA registered unit standard version 2 Page 1 of 9. Demonstrate flying skills for an airline transport pilot licence (aeroplane) Page 1 of 9 Title Demonstrate flying skills for an airline transport pilot licence (aeroplane) Level 6 Credits 35 Purpose People credited with this unit standard are able, for an airline transport pilot

More information

Nav Specs and Procedure Design Module 12 Activities 8 and 10. European Airspace Concept Workshops for PBN Implementation

Nav Specs and Procedure Design Module 12 Activities 8 and 10. European Airspace Concept Workshops for PBN Implementation Nav Specs and Procedure Design Module 12 Activities 8 and 10 European Airspace Concept Workshops for PBN Implementation Learning Objectives By the end of this presentation you should understand: The different

More information

i4d A MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY PERSPECTIVE GROUND AND AIRBORNE ASPECTS Michel Procoudine Lionel Rouchouse Thales

i4d A MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY PERSPECTIVE GROUND AND AIRBORNE ASPECTS Michel Procoudine Lionel Rouchouse Thales i4d A MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY PERSPECTIVE GROUND AND AIRBORNE ASPECTS Michel Procoudine Lionel Rouchouse Thales 1 Single European Sky ATM Research (SESAR) - Objectives Enabling EU skies to handle 3 times

More information

DANUBE FAB real-time simulation 7 November - 2 December 2011

DANUBE FAB real-time simulation 7 November - 2 December 2011 EUROCONTROL DANUBE FAB real-time simulation 7 November - 2 December 2011 Visitor Information DANUBE FAB in context The framework for the creation and operation of a Functional Airspace Block (FAB) is laid

More information

FLIGHT PATH FOR THE FUTURE OF MOBILITY

FLIGHT PATH FOR THE FUTURE OF MOBILITY FLIGHT PATH FOR THE FUTURE OF MOBILITY Building the flight path for the future of mobility takes more than imagination. Success relies on the proven ability to transform vision into reality for the betterment

More information

Air Law. Iain Darby NAPC/PH-NSIL IAEA. International Atomic Energy Agency

Air Law. Iain Darby NAPC/PH-NSIL IAEA. International Atomic Energy Agency Air Law Iain Darby NAPC/PH-NSIL International Atomic Energy Agency Aviation Regulations International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) Convention on International Civil Aviation also known as the Chicago

More information

Appendix B Ultimate Airport Capacity and Delay Simulation Modeling Analysis

Appendix B Ultimate Airport Capacity and Delay Simulation Modeling Analysis Appendix B ULTIMATE AIRPORT CAPACITY & DELAY SIMULATION MODELING ANALYSIS B TABLE OF CONTENTS EXHIBITS TABLES B.1 Introduction... 1 B.2 Simulation Modeling Assumption and Methodology... 4 B.2.1 Runway

More information

Surveillance and Broadcast Services

Surveillance and Broadcast Services Surveillance and Broadcast Services Benefits Analysis Overview August 2007 Final Investment Decision Baseline January 3, 2012 Program Status: Investment Decisions September 9, 2005 initial investment decision:

More information

Risk assessment for drones operations

Risk assessment for drones operations Risk assessment for drones operations 16th of November 018 Catherine Ronflé-Nadaud DGAC /DSNA /DTI French Air Navigation Service Provider is responsible for delivering Air Traffic control services within

More information

Overview. ETSO Workshop 2008 New Developments in Avionic. Friedhelm Runge

Overview. ETSO Workshop 2008 New Developments in Avionic. Friedhelm Runge ETSO Workshop 2008 New Developments in Avionic Friedhelm Runge Parts & Appliances Avionics PCM Dec. 2008 P&A section 1 Overview Single European Sky Communication Datalink 8.33 khz VHF Navigation ICAO PBN

More information

Remotely Piloted Operations Integration

Remotely Piloted Operations Integration ITALIAN AIR FORCE Remotely Piloted Operations Integration Colonel Claudio CASTELLANO Bruxelles, 25.10.2018 Analize RP operations Define RP operations due regard/accommodation solutions with effective interaction

More information

TWELFTH AIR NAVIGATION CONFERENCE

TWELFTH AIR NAVIGATION CONFERENCE International Civil Aviation Organization 17/5/12 WORKING PAPER TWELFTH AIR NAVIGATION CONFERENCE Montréal, 19 to 30 November 2012 Agenda Item 4: Optimum Capacity and Efficiency through global collaborative

More information

TWELFTH AIR NAVIGATION CONFERENCE

TWELFTH AIR NAVIGATION CONFERENCE International Civil Aviation Organization AN-Conf/12-WP/6 7/5/12 WORKING PAPER TWELFTH AIR NAVIGATION CONFERENCE Agenda Item 2: Aerodrome operations improving airport performance 2.2: Performance-based

More information

Appendix A REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION FORM

Appendix A REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION FORM Appendix A REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION FORM Note. For details on completing this form, and for definitions of acronyms and abbreviations, see section on Information Required for the Assessment of Authorization

More information

Roadmapping Breakout Session Overview

Roadmapping Breakout Session Overview Roadmapping Breakout Session Overview Ken Goodrich October 22, 2015 Definition Roadmap: a specialized type of strategic plan that outlines activities an organization can undertake over specified time frames

More information

Approach Specifications

Approach Specifications Approach Specifications RNP Approach (RNP APCH) and Baro-VNAV Approach Specifications RNP APCH and Baro-VNAV 1 Overview Learning Objectives: At the end of this presentation, you should: Understand the

More information

FLIGHT OPERATIONS PANEL

FLIGHT OPERATIONS PANEL International Civil Aviation Organization FLTOPSP/WG/2-WP/18 10/04/15 WORKING PAPER FLIGHT OPERATIONS PANEL WORKING GROUP MEETING SECOND MEETING Rome Italy, 4 to 8 May 2015 Agenda Item 5 : New Work Programme

More information

Controller Training Case Study Implementation of new RNP AR APCH for RWY07 (North Circuit) at HKIA

Controller Training Case Study Implementation of new RNP AR APCH for RWY07 (North Circuit) at HKIA Controller Training Case Study Implementation of new RNP AR APCH for RWY07 (North Circuit) at HKIA Disclaimer This presentation is for information purposes only. It should not be relied on as the sole

More information

Global Interoperability - Airborne Architecture and Avionics Interoperability Roadmap Project Number Project Manager

Global Interoperability - Airborne Architecture and Avionics Interoperability Roadmap Project Number Project Manager Final Project Report Document information Project Title Global Interoperability - Airborne Architecture and Avionics Interoperability Roadmap Project Number 09.49 Project Manager Deliverable Name Deliverable

More information

EUROCONTROL AVAL Project. AVAL Phase 1 findings (presented by Thierry Arino)

EUROCONTROL AVAL Project. AVAL Phase 1 findings (presented by Thierry Arino) EUROCONTROL AVAL Project AVAL Phase 1 findings (presented by Thierry Arino) Slide 1 Presentation content Introduction Safety benefits of ACAS VLJs and LJs below 5,700 kg: what are they? What are the safety

More information

The Legal Framework for RPAS/UAS Suitability of the Chicago Convention and its Annexes

The Legal Framework for RPAS/UAS Suitability of the Chicago Convention and its Annexes The Legal Framework for RPAS/UAS Suitability of the Chicago Convention and its Annexes 27 May 2013 Page 1 Non-Lawyers 27 May 2013 Page 2 Lawyers 27 May 2013 Page 3 Is the Chicago Convention Suitable? م

More information

SESAR Solutions at ATC Global Surface Management

SESAR Solutions at ATC Global Surface Management SESAR Solutions at ATC Global Surface Management Beijing 18 th September 2014 Roland Kaps-Becker, Zurich Airport SEAC Contribution Manager SESAR European Airport Consortium Overview SEAC members Airports

More information

Trajectory Based Operations

Trajectory Based Operations Trajectory Based Operations Far-Term Concept Proposed Trade-Space Activities Environmental Working Group Operations Standing Committee July 29, 2009 Rose.Ashford@nasa.gov Purpose for this Presentation

More information

SOFIA. Safe AutOmatic Flight Back and LandIng of Aircraft

SOFIA. Safe AutOmatic Flight Back and LandIng of Aircraft SOFIA Safe AutOmatic Flight Back and LandIng of Aircraft At: AERODAYS 2011 Session 4A2 Date: 31/03/2011 By: Juan Alberto Herrería (jherreria@isdefe.es) Tel: + 34 91 271 1747 AERODAYS 2011. Madrid, 31-03-2011

More information

Optimizing trajectories over the 4DWeatherCube

Optimizing trajectories over the 4DWeatherCube Optimizing trajectories over the 4DWeatherCube Detailed Proposal - SES Awards 2016 Airbus Defence and Space : dirk.schindler@airbus.com Luciad : robin.houtmeyers@luciad.com Eumetnet : kamel.rebai@meteo.fr

More information

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES. Draft. COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No /2010

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES. Draft. COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No /2010 COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES Brussels, XXX Draft COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No /2010 of [ ] on safety oversight in air traffic management and air navigation services (Text with EEA relevance)

More information

Russian Federation ATM modernization program

Russian Federation ATM modernization program Russian Federation ATM modernization program Alexander Vedernikov Deputy Director of Federal Air Transport Agency 20-21 March, 2012, Moscow Main strategic directions of Russian Air Navigation System development

More information

CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY, PAKISTAN OPERATIONAL CONTROL SYSTEMS CONTENTS

CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY, PAKISTAN OPERATIONAL CONTROL SYSTEMS CONTENTS CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY, PAKISTAN Air Navigation Order No. : 91-0004 Date : 7 th April, 2010 Issue : Two OPERATIONAL CONTROL SYSTEMS CONTENTS SECTIONS 1. Authority 2. Purpose 3. Scope 4. Operational Control

More information

RECOMMENDED GUIDANCE FOR FPL AND RELATED ATS MESSAGES

RECOMMENDED GUIDANCE FOR FPL AND RELATED ATS MESSAGES RECOMMENDED GUIDANCE FOR FPL AND RELATED ATS MESSAGES Abbreviations ACI ADS ADS-B ADS-C AFTN AIDC AIP ANSP AMHS APAC APANPIRG ASBU ASIOACG ATFM ATM ATS AUSEP CHG CNL CPDLC CPL DARP DLA EOBT FAA FIR FIRBX

More information

TRAFFIC ALERT AND COLLISION AVOIDANCE SYSTEM (TCAS II)

TRAFFIC ALERT AND COLLISION AVOIDANCE SYSTEM (TCAS II) TRAFFIC ALERT AND COLLISION AVOIDANCE SYSTEM (TCAS II) Version 1.0 Effective June 2004 CASADOC 205 Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS II) This is an internal CASA document. It contains

More information

Change History. Table of Contents. Contents of Figures. Content of Tables

Change History. Table of Contents. Contents of Figures. Content of Tables Change History Version Status Date Affected Pages Author Cause and Summary of the Change 00.01 Draft 2017-03-29 All H. Scherzer First draft 01.00 Released 2017-03-30 All H. Scherzer Released version Table

More information

TWELFTH AIR NAVIGATION CONFERENCE

TWELFTH AIR NAVIGATION CONFERENCE International Civil Aviation Organization AN-Conf/12-WP/8 7/5/12 WORKING PAPER TWELFTH AIR NAVIGATION CONFERENCE Montréal, 19 to 30 November 2012 Agenda Item 3: Interoperability and data through globally

More information

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA OFFICE OF DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CIVIL AVIATION

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA OFFICE OF DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CIVIL AVIATION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA OFFICE OF DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CIVIL AVIATION ANSS AC NO. 1 of 2017 31.07. 2017 Air Space and Air Navigation Services Standard ADVISORY CIRCULAR Subject: Procedures to follow in case

More information

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU)

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 18.10.2011 Official Journal of the European Union L 271/15 COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 1034/2011 of 17 October 2011 on safety oversight in air traffic management and air navigation services

More information

RPAS integration in non segregated airspace: the SESAR approach

RPAS integration in non segregated airspace: the SESAR approach RPAS integration in non segregated airspace: the SESAR approach System interfaces needed for integration Technical University of Madrid (UPM) Madrid, 25th November 2014 Ricardo Román Cordón Francisco Javier

More information

Follow-the-Greens: The Controllers Point of View Results from a SESAR Real Time Simulation with Controllers

Follow-the-Greens: The Controllers Point of View Results from a SESAR Real Time Simulation with Controllers Follow-the-Greens: The Controllers Point of View Results from a SESAR Real Time Simulation with Controllers AHFE 2016, Human Factors in Transportation Orlando 30th July 2016 Karsten Straube 1, Marcus Roßbach

More information

Packaging Tomorrow s Aviation System

Packaging Tomorrow s Aviation System International Civil Aviation Organization Second Briefing on ICAO s Aviation System Block Upgrades Issued: July 2012 The 30 000 Feet View Air traffic growth expands two-fold once every 15 years Growth

More information

The type rating of test pilots having flown the aircraft for its development and certification needs to be addressed as a special case.

The type rating of test pilots having flown the aircraft for its development and certification needs to be addressed as a special case. FLIGHT TESTING: COMMENTS ON NPA 2008-17,PILOT LICENSING FCL.700 Circumstances in which class or type ratings are required Subparagraph (b) (b) Notwithstanding paragraph (a), in the case of flights related

More information

Surveillance Opportunities and Challenges

Surveillance Opportunities and Challenges Services Info Days Brussels, 6-7 December 2017 Opportunities and Challenges Christos Rekkas Head of SUR Modernisation TLP: GREEN 1 SUR Applications list extending PSR/SSR Mode S Elementary Enhanced ADS-C

More information

PBN Performance. Based Navigation. Days 1, 2 & 3. ICAO PBN Seminar Seminar Case Studies Days 1,2,3. Seminar Case Studies

PBN Performance. Based Navigation. Days 1, 2 & 3. ICAO PBN Seminar Seminar Case Studies Days 1,2,3. Seminar Case Studies PBN Performance Based Navigation Seminar Case Studies Days 1, 2 & 3 1 Overview 2 Case Study - Day 1 Case Study - Day 2 Case Study - Day 3 3 Case Study - Day 1 Learning Objectives Identify navigation performance

More information

Products, Practices and Future

Products, Practices and Future ANSP Guideline for RPAS Operations Doug Davis Northrop Grumman Director of Airworthiness Chair, UAS WorkGroup Products, Practices and Future Scope Introduction and Objectives Conducting Routine RPAS Ops:

More information

FINAL REPORT BOEING B777, REGISTRATION 9V-SWH LOSS OF SEPARATION EVENT 3 JULY 2014

FINAL REPORT BOEING B777, REGISTRATION 9V-SWH LOSS OF SEPARATION EVENT 3 JULY 2014 FINAL REPORT BOEING B777, REGISTRATION 9V-SWH LOSS OF SEPARATION EVENT 3 JULY 2014 AIB/AAI/CAS.109 Air Accident Investigation Bureau of Singapore Ministry of Transport Singapore 11 November 2015 The Air

More information