Products, Practices and Future

Transcription

1

2 ANSP Guideline for RPAS Operations Doug Davis Northrop Grumman Director of Airworthiness Chair, UAS WorkGroup Products, Practices and Future

3 Scope Introduction and Objectives Conducting Routine RPAS Ops: Unique Characteristics Aerodrome and Terminal RPAS Ops General RPAS Requirements Special handling / In-Flight characteristics Impact on FDP Systems Contingency and Emergency Operation Procedures: Comm Loss / Lost Link Emergency landing / Flight Termination Examples of Best Practice: US and Switzerland Conclusions

4 Introduction and Background RPAS operators seek greater access to airspace - will increasingly interact with the ATM system and pose many challenges ICAO Handbook publication anticipated Fall Regulation to follow Current RPAS have a variety of shapes, sizes, equipage and performance capabilities Equivalence with manned aviation is the key, but RPAS have several unique attributes to integrate

5 Guideline Objectives Raise awareness of RPAS ops to ANSPs Inform ANSPs how RPAS have been accommodated safely into ATM Identify issues to be addressed to achieve RPAS integration Suggested audience: Policy makers, management and those responsible for procedures Focus: Medium/High Altitude Long Endurance (MALE/HALE) RPA operating in Controlled Airspace

6 RPAS Components and Unique Characteristics Text

7 Impact of Routine RPAS Operations Ground movement / taxiing can be challenging In-Flight: IFR-only, slow, spiral climb, flights from A- to-a, high altitude, non-std GPS-based avionics Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) ops normally only in segregated airspace but, employing SMS principles, some exceptions: Swiss, USA and Arctic C2 datalink via satellite - potential for latency RPAS-specific phraseology not yet developed Impact on FDP Systems: multiple waypoints, long endurance, non-std flight plan data

8 Contingency and Emergency RPAS Procedures Radio Failure Manned Aircraft Lost Link: The loss of C2 link with the RPA such that the remote pilot can no longer manage the aircraft s flight. RPA follows pre-programmed maneuver - requires detailed pre-flight ANSP-RPAS collaboration Diversion: Should be Manned Aircraft, but ANSP- RPAS pre-planning required Flight Termination System (FTS): last resort CFIT Note: All aspects of RPAS ops should have ANSP input

9 Best Practice: USA Global Hawk (GH) ops in NAS case by case Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) issued by FAA to Fed Govt proponents for ops outside Special Use Airspace GH LOA addresses ops and ATC requirements - unique and specific to each location and/or airport ATC provide separation with IFR traffic in Class A and Class E airspace (> FL600) based on GH IFR Flight Plan, with coordinated Contingency plans Squawk code 7400 is under development for Lost Link COA - A time-consuming but safe process

10 Best Practice: Switzerland Swiss Air Force: SMS-based sequential approach 1988: OAT RPAS ops began 2005: NVFR Flights in class E and G 2007: Unsegregated flights within MIL CTR/TMA 2010: Quasi-segregated flights in civil TMAs June 2013: 24/7 IFR-only ops in class C: Fixed callsign Single link failure mission abort Dual link failure pre-programmed RTB Newly procured RPAS plans for more integration

11 Conclusion Several ANSPs have safely and successfully integrated RPAS outside segregated airspace To date mostly case-by-case basis - universally applicable procedures not yet developed Current RPAS cannot operate seamlessly - ANSPs have to be flexible and imaginative It will be essential for ANSPs to work closely with RPAS developers, manufacturers and operators for: ICAO ASBU, NextGen and SESAR

12