UAS Traffic Management Conflict Management Model

Marcus Johnson; Jarrett Larrow

Home/Archive/NASA NTRS

NASA NTRS · 20205002076

UAS Traffic Management Conflict Management Model

Marcus Johnson·Jarrett Larrow

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Version 2 of the UAS Traffic Management (UTM) Conflict Management Model. This document is a concept overview paper that describes the conflict mitigation methodology that supports the use cases described in TCL 4 operating environments (urban BVLOS operations). The general conflict mitigation model values the use of redundant mitigation technologies that operate over different time horizons to reach a target level of safety for the operation. Separation provision contributes to the safety of the overall separation, and each participant (USS, UAS, other airspace users) is responsible for ensuring separation is maintained between aircraft. The intent of this document is to capture the minimum level of separation provisions that are necessary for safe operations in the airspace. Additional equipage and capability can be seen as a mechanism to enhance safety but may not be the minimum need for entry into the airspace.

Explore related subjects

UTM Conflict Management Unmanned Aircraft System(UAS)

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Marcus Johnson, Jarrett Larrow. 2020-05-15. UAS Traffic Management Conflict Management Model. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20205002076

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related reports

NASA NTRS2020

TCL4 UTM (UAS Traffic Management) Nevada 2019 Flight Tests, Airspace Operations Laboratory (AOL) Report

The Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM) research project has been developing and testing concept ideas for enabling small UAS (sUAS) operations in low altitude airspace (ground to 400 feet). To do this, NASA has organized a series of flight test demonstrations. Technology Capability Level-4 (TCL4) flight tests were conducted at a Nevada, USA test site, during June 2019. The testing resulted in over 300 data collection flights using eight live rotorcraft, 15 simulated vehicles, involving six flight crews and five Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) Service Suppliers (USS). The TCL4 approach was designed to demonstrate five scenarios that set up five diverse sets of UAS events and activities. The Nevada test site focused on three of these scenarios: an incoming weather front, a concert event with an incident requiring an emergency response, and a scenario where multiple vehicles experienced Communication, Navigation, and Surveillance (CNS) issues. The test site created their scenarios to each have three phases and were required to complete three executions of each scenario, for a total of nine missions per Nevada vehicle per scenario. This document presents data collected from participants during the TCL4-Nevada flight test that provides information about how much and how well operators were able to make use of UTM functions and information, with the goal of exploring what the minimum information requirements and/or best practices might be in TCL4 operations. The driving enquiry was: how do UTM tools and features support (human) operators leading to safe and effective conduct of large-scale beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS) sUAS operations in “urban canyon” environments? As with the data collected during previous similar tests (e.g., TCL3, Martin et al., 2019), the quality of the UTM information exchanged, and the meaningfulness and therefore usefulness of this information, were all focal points of the questions asked and the data collected. Data aligned with five human-system attributes to indicate that UTM provided information that contributed to users’ ability to operate safely and effectively within UTM, but that information was not always complete and was sometimes unclear.

UTM↗

NASA NTRS2019

UAS Service Supplier Framework for Authentication and Authorization

The Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM) Service Supplier (USS) Framework for Authentication and Authorization (UFAA) is the basis for secure and confident data exchanges between the Flight Information Management System (FIMS) and the USS Network and within the USS Network itself. UFAA is built upon the OAuth 2.0 approach to federated authorization, with details supplied by various Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comment documents (RFCs). Whenever possible, a specific standard is used to support a design decision within UFAA, and when an applicable standard is not found/used, the technical decision is explained as much as possible. This document describes UFAA in detail. It is intended to serve as a reference for other key UTM documents and should be useful to many UTM stakeholders. This is an informative document. The requirements stated or implied in this document will need to be fully vetted and reviewed by appropriate stakeholders before becoming operational. It is highly encouraged that in any design decisions for future applicable standards that are counter to or missing from the decisions presented herein be justified in that future standard.

UTM↗

NASA NTRS2019

Use of UAS Reports (UREPs) during TCL3 Field Testing

During the NASA Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM) Project’s Technical Capability Level 3 (TCL3) demonstration, a service for stakeholders to share weather and aircraft observations was tested. The overall goal was to increase awareness of airspace and weather activity to increase a pilot’s ability to fly safely. To achieve this goal, a mechanism to share data was created, called “UAS Reports” or UREPs, which were generated by client systems and sent to a central data service. The data service provided subscriptions and allowed for data requests to share the reports that had been sent in by stakeholders. To execute this functionality, four FAA (Federal Aviation Administration)-designated UAS test sites performed UREP testing as part of TCL3. NASA provided the centralized service and test site partners flew missions and simulated activity at the test sites to generate data to send to the service. The loop was closed by having other clients (usually other small UAS operators) request those data from the service or subscribe to feeds from the service. Overall, the tests demonstrated the utility of such a service. In this report, the testing setup, data collection, and analysis of results are presented. The concept of UREPs has since been incorporated as a service within NASA’s Conflict Mitigation Model for UTM. The concept will continue to be tested in NASA’s TCL4 activities.

UTM↗