Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “UAs”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 559 records · Page 31
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2016

Applying Required Navigation Performance Concept for Traffic Management of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems

In anticipation of a rapid increase in the number of civil Unmanned Aircraft System(UAS) operations, NASA is researching prototype technologies for a UAS Traffic Management (UTM) system that will investigate airspace integration requirements for enabling safe, efficient low-altitude operations. One aspect a UTM system must consider is the correlation between UAS operations (such as vehicles, operation areas and durations), UAS performance requirements, and the risk to people and property in the operational area. This paper investigates the potential application of the International Civil Aviation Organizations (ICAO) Required Navigation Performance (RNP) concept to relate operational risk with trajectory conformance requirements. The approach is to first define a method to quantify operational risk and then define the RNP level requirement as a function of the operational risk. Greater operational risk corresponds to more accurate RNP level, or smaller tolerable Total System Error (TSE). Data from 19 small UAS flights are used to develop and validate a formula that defines this relationship. An approach to assessing UAS-RNP conformance capability using vehicle modeling and wind field simulation is developed to investigate how this formula may be applied in a future UTM system. The results indicate the modeled vehicles flight path is robust to the simulated wind variation, and it can meet RNP level requirements calculated by the formula. The results also indicate how vehicle-modeling fidelity may be improved to adequately verify assessed RNP level.

required navigation performance↗
NASA NTRS2016

Unmanned Aircraft Systems in the National Airspace System: A Formal Methods Perspective

As the technological and operational capabilities of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) have grown, so too have international efforts to integrate UAS into civil airspace. However, one of the major concerns that must be addressed in realizing this integration is that of safety. For example, UAS lack an on-board pilot to comply with the legal requirement that pilots see and avoid other aircraft. This requirement has motivated the development of a detect and avoid (DAA) capability for UAS that provides situational awareness and maneuver guidance to UAS operators to aid them in avoiding and remaining well clear of other aircraft in the airspace. The NASA Langley Research Center Formal Methods group has played a fundamental role in the development of this capability. This article gives a selected survey of the formal methods work conducted in support of the development of a DAA concept for UAS. This work includes specification of low-level and high-level functional requirements, formal verification of algorithms, and rigorous validation of software implementations.

Munoz, Cesar A.↗
NASA NTRS2017

The Use of a Satellite Communications System for Command and Control of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Surrogate Unmanned Aerial System Research Aircraft

The NASA Langley Research Center has transformed a Cirrus Design SR22 general aviation (GA) aircraft into an Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) Surrogate research aircraft which has served for several years as a platform for unmanned systems research and development. The aircraft is manned with a Safety Pilot and a Research Systems Operator (RSO) that allows for flight operations almost any-where in the national airspace system (NAS) without the need for a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Certificate of Authorization (COA). The UAS Surrogate can be remotely controlled from a modular, transportable ground control station (GCS) like a true UAS. Ground control of the aircraft is accomplished by the use of data links that allow the two-way passage of the required data to control the aircraft and provide the GCS with situational awareness. The original UAS Surrogate data-link system was composed of redundant very high frequency (VHF) data radio modems with a maximum range of approximately 40 nautical miles. A new requirement was developed to extend this range beyond visual range (BVR). This new requirement led to the development of a satellite communications system that provided the means to command and control the UAS Surrogate at ranges beyond the limits of the VHF data links. The system makes use of the Globalstar low earth orbit (LEO) satellite communications system. This paper will provide details of the development, implementation, and flight testing of the satellite data communications system on the UAS Surrogate research aircraft.

Howell, Charles T.↗
NASA NTRS2017

Ensuring Interoperability Between Unmanned Aircraft Detect-and-Avoid and Manned Aircraft Collision Avoidance

The Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) community in the United States has identified the need for a collision avoidance region in which UAS Detect-and-Avoid (DAA) vertical guidance is restricted to preclude interoperability issues with manned aircraft collision avoidance system vertical resolution advisories (RAs). This paper documents the process by which the collision avoidance region was defined. Three candidate definitions were evaluated on 1.3 million simulated pairwise encounters between UAS and manned aircraft covering a wide range of horizontal and vertical closure rates, angles, and miss distances. Each definition was evaluated with regard to UAS DAA interoperability with manned aircraft collision avoidance in terms of how well it achieved: 1) the primary objective of restricting DAA vertical guidance prior to RAs when the aircraft are close, and 2) the secondary objective of avoiding unnecessary restrictions of DAA vertical guidance at DAA alerts when the aircraft are further apart. The collision avoidance region definition that fully achieves the primary objective and best achieves the secondary objective was recommended to and accepted by the UAS community in the United States. By this definition, UAS and manned aircraft are in the collision avoidance region where DAA vertical guidance is restricted when the time to closest point of approach (CPA) is less than 50 seconds and either the time to co-altitude is less than 50 seconds or the current vertical separation is less than 800 feet.

unmanned aircraft systems; collision avoidance; in↗
NASA NTRS2016

Feasibility of Varying Geo-Fence Around an Unmanned Aircraft Operation Based on Vehicle Performance and Wind

Managing trajectory separation is critical to ensuring accessibility, efficiency, and safety in the unmanned airspace. The notion of geo-fences is an emerging concept, where distance buffers enclose individual trajectories and areas of operation in order to manage the airspace. Currently, the Air Traffic Management system for commercial travel defines static distance buffers around the aircraft; however, commercial UASs are envisioned to operate in significantly closer proximity to other UAS requiring a geo-fence for spacing operations. The geo-fence size can be determined based on vehicle performance characteristics, state of the airspace, weather, and other unforeseen events such as emergency or disaster response. Calculation of the geo-fence size could be determined as part of pre-flight planning and during real-time operations. A largely non-homogeneous fleet of UASs will be operating in low altitude and will likely be commercially developed. Due to intellectual property concerns, the operators may not provide detailed specifications of the control system to UTM. In addition, the huge variety of UAS makes modeling each control system prohibitive and flight data for these vehicles may not exist. Therefore, a generalized, simple geo-fence sizing algorithm must be developed such that it does not rely on detailed knowledge of the vehicle control system, accounts for the presence of urban winds, and is sufficiently accurate. In this work, two simple models are investigated to determine its feasibility as an adequate means for calculating the geo-fence size. The vehicle data used in this work are provided by UAS manufactures who have partnered with NASA's UTM project and some publicly available websites. The first model utilizes wind data processed from the NOAA HRRR (Hourly Rapid Refresh) product and Sonar Annemometer data provided by San Jose State. The second model utilizes OpenFOAM which is a CFD code used to generate a wind field for flow around a single building. The key vehicle performance parameters can include UAS response time to disturbances, command to actuation latency, control system rate limits, time to recovery to desired path, and aerodynamics. It was found that the first model provides an initial understanding of geo-fence sizing, but does not provide enough accuracy to provide UTM with an efficient means of scheduling vehicles. The results of the second model reveal that modeling UAS controls systems with a linearized plant and gain scheduled PID controller does not allow capture the UAS flight dynamics within a significant envelope of the wind disturbances.

uncertainty↗
NASA NTRS2015

Appendix A: NAS-Wide Encounter Rate Evaluation Using Historical Radar Data and the Airspace Concept Evaluation System (ACES)

Regulations that establish operational and performance requirements for unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) are being developed by a consortium of government, industry and academic institutions. Those requirements will apply to detect-and-avoid (DAA) systems and other equipment necessary to integrate UAS with the National Airspace System (NAS) and are determined according to their contribution to the overall level of safety required to operate in the airspace. Several key gaps must be addressed in order to link equipment requirements to an airspace level of safety. Foremost among these is the calculation of the relative effectiveness of a particular system to mitigate violations of a separation standard with other aircraft, which is known as the systems risk ratio. The risk ratio is calculated as the probability of mid-air collision with a DAA system divided by the probability of mid-air collision without a DAA system. The risk ratio of a DAA system, in combination with the risk ratios of other collision avoidance mitigations, will determine the overall safety of the airspace measured in terms of the number of mid-air collisions per flight hour. Defining the required risk ratio that the DAA system needs to ensure the safety of the airspace requires an evaluation of the current airspace and a simulated evaluation that incorporates UAS aerodynamic performance and the mission characteristics of future UAS operations that are projected to be conducted in areas that interact with current operations. These evaluations will produce the frequency of encounters that currently exist in the airspace and those that could be generated with the introduction of UAS. Together, the frequency of encounters, an evaluation of unmitigated risk of collision, and a desired level of safety of the airspace will yield a required risk ratio of the DAA system. This study will focus on evaluating the encounter rates between aircraft based on historical radar data and encounter rates that could occur based on simulated UAS missions.

Unmanned Aircraft Systems↗
NASA NTRS2019

A Comparison of Two Terminal Area Detect and Avoid Well Clear Definitions

Technical requirements are currently under development for a detect and avoid system (DAA) that would support the operation of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) within the National Airspace System (NAS). Such a system would aid UAS operators in maintaining sufficient separation, or "well clear", from other aircraft in their vicinity. The first set of technical standards for a UAS DAA system (referred to as "Phase 1" requirements) was limited to UAS operations transiting through Class D, E, and G airspace to, or from, Class A (or special-use) airspace. Explicitly out of scope of the Phase 1 requirements was the operation of UAS within terminal airspace in the NAS. Fern, Rorie, Roberts and Monk (2018) explored the application of a Phase 1 DAA system within Class D terminal airspace in a human-in-the-loop simulation. The results of the study demonstrated a poor fit of the Phase 1 DAA well clear (DWC) definition to these terminal operations. The original DWC definition was designed for the en-route environment and could not account for the complex, tightly-choreographed nature of traffic typically found near an airport. The interaction of the en-route DWC definition and the terminal area traffic led to excessive DAA alerting against safely-separated traffic. The frequent alerting quickly degraded pilots' ability to discriminate between encounters where a maneuver was or was not necessary. This resulted in slower response times, higher rates of losses of DAA well clear, and more severe losses of DAA well clear than had been observed in previous DAA research (e.g., Rorie et al., 2017). The current paper reports on a follow-on study to Fern et al. (2018) that tested two DWC definitions designed to accommodate standard terminal area operating procedures, such as traffic in the downwind leg of a VFR traffic pattern while the UAS is on final. The two definitions utilized identical horizontal and vertical thresholds but differed in whether or not Tau (a function that takes into account the closure rate of two aircraft) was included as a part of the DWC hazard zone. The "Tau" DWC candidate definition nominally extended the DWC hazard zone by 15 seconds in the direction of the intruder aircraft, while the "No Tau" DWC candidate definition did not extend the DWC hazard zone. The results of this follow-on study indicated that both candidate definitions improved pilot and DAA system performance relative to Fern et al (2018). Pilot response times and rates of losses of DWC returned to levels comparable to earlier research in the en-route environment. Several important differences between the two DWC candidate definitions, however, are also discussed.

Terminal Area↗
NASA NTRS2019

Effectiveness of Redundant Communications Systems in Maintaining Operational Control of Small Unmanned Aircraft

As a part of NASA’s Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM) research, a test was performed to evaluate the effectiveness of the redundant Command and Control (C2) communications system for maintaining operational control of small UAS in the airspace over a rural area. In the test, operators set up a primary and a secondary UAS C2 communications system, sent a maneuver command to an Unmanned Aircraft (UA) with and without a functioning primary system, then verified the execution of the sent command to confirm the operator control. Operators reported that the tested redundancy configurations were effective in maintaining operational control in the test airspace over rural locations. Since the next phase of UTM research focuses on operations in an urban area where an increased level of Radio Frequency (RF) activities occur compared to a rural area, four recommendations are provided to sustain the effectiveness of redundancy in urban operations. First, the operator should not include C2 systems that use the industrial, scientific, and medical (ISM) radio bands in redundancy configurations. Second, the operator should verify the RF characteristics of the intended operation area and examine the area’s radio noise floor. Third, the operator should monitor the availability, quality, and reliability of communications services used by a redundant system. Fourth, the small UAS community should adopt a standard set of contingency steps to handle the loss of C2 communications so that such events are managed in a consistent manner across the airspace. The insights from the test will be used to accommodate the FAA’s UAS integration effort.

Jung, Jaewoo↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Obtaining Public Opinion about sUAS Activity in an Urban Environment

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, a series of flight test demonstrations were organized over five years at seven test sites. Technology Capability Level-4 (TCL4), the most complex flight tests, were conducted in Texas, USA, during August 2019. This testing resulted in over 400 data collection flights using eight live rotorcraft, with nine flight crews flying pre-planned scenarios in the urban downtown and waterfront areas of Corpus Christi, Texas. Test scenarios were designed to include a variety of elements, including live and simulated vehicles, and personnel in many different roles, including flight crews and mission personnel. One group of people who did not have a role in the flight tests but will be affected by UAS operations as they become more ubiquitous, are the general public. What do the public think about sUAS operations in urban areas? In order to obtain a reference point that noted the public's view of the operations in the TCL4 demonstration, a short survey was developed and offered to members of the public who wished to comment on the sUAS activities they saw in their city during two weeks in August, 2019.Forty five people completed the online public opinion survey. Participants volunteered to take it, creating a self-selected sample. The survey included eleven questions that asked participants about their level of comfort and concerns with UAS activity; their knowledge of UAS operations; and, whether a traffic management system like UTM would increase their confidence in urban UAS activity. The general public in Corpus Christi showed a good level of knowledge of sUAS regulations, with almost half of their responses to the knowledge portion of the survey being correct. They expressed a moderate level of concern (x = 4.7 out of 7) at urban sUAS activity and, of those who cited a concern, the majority reported this was about privacy (54%), which are all responses in line with those reported in earlier research on public opinion. Views on UTM were mixed, with respondents indicating they thought the introduction of UTM will improve safety somewhat (5.2 out of 7) but it will also increase their concern a little (4.6 out of 7). This would indicate there needs to be more information and educational material about the UTM concept made available to the public with the aim to reduce public concerns about the system.

Caterina Grossi↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The System Modeling and Analysis of Resiliency in STEReO (SMARt-STEReO)

Wildfire emergency response has remained rooted in relatively low-tech solutions for coordination between ground and aerial assets. These low-tech solutions are robust for the remote environments in which wildfires are usually fought, but limit strategic cross-organizational support and the ability to deploy and effectively utilize aerial assets. As aircraft become more advanced and new technology, including drones, become available to firefighters, a new, more modern method of asset coordination is needed. NASA is working on a project called ‘Scalable Traffic Management for Emergency Response Operations’ (STEReO) to integrate unmanned aerial systems (UAS)and UAS traffic management (UTM)into wildfire response. STEReO’s goals include simplifying the coordination of aerial assets, improving the existing UAS framework, and increasing the role of additional autonomous systems to reduce human risk and to increase system resilience. This paper describes the development of the ‘System Modeling and Analysis of Resiliency in STEReO’ (SMARt-STEReO) project, which aims to model wildfire response and to quantify the additional system resilience that STEReO technology provides firefighters. This paper verifies SMARt-STEReO and defines its scope; it includes experimental and statistical analysis of the impact that the addition of UAS has on both performance metrics and also on performance resiliency response to a given fault. SMARt-STEReO is a grid-based model of fire propagation that incorporates varying crew responses. Through the use of a Python package called ‘fmdtools’, the model easily allows for the addition of faults to the system. These faults allow analysts to investigate various response parameters. Factors including terrain, fuel type and wind speed can be modified to affect the fire propagation; additionally, the number of ground crews, engines, fixed wing aircraft, helicopters, and UAS can be changed to affect the crew response. The communication lines between actors mimic those used in real life situations. This paper explains the development of SMARt-STEReO including background research, verification and validation, and preliminary experimental analysis of system resilience to both a minor and major fault in systems with and without UAS.

Resiliency↗
NASA NTRS2022

PAAV Concept Document

The Pathfinding for Airspace with Autonomous Vehicles (PAAV) Concept Document, version 1.0, lays out the key challenges and potential solutions for the use of uncrewed aircraft (UA) technology for future regional air cargo operations. The challenges and solutions described in this document were informed by communications with the UA industry community (e.g., RTCA, the Federal Aviation Administration, and regional air cargo business operators), as well as the PAAV team’s research activities during the last two years including four tabletop exercises, a human-in-the-loop simulation study, a numerical simulation study, a functional allocation study, and flight data analysis (Appendix A). This document first describes the expected operational context of PAAV (Section 2), such as the flight mission, baseline UAS components, nominal operations, m:N operations (i.e., "m" remote pilots per "N" aircraft), and off-nominal operations. This context sets the scope for the PAAV concept development work. PAAV concept development assumes that UA operations will be increasingly autonomous. Thus, near- and far-term assumptions are defined (Section 3). PAAV identified seven key challenges for UA operations (Section 4): - Flight route planning - Separation and flow management - Traffic pattern integration - Contingency management - Taxi, takeoff, and landing - m:N operations - Communications operations The following 13 potential solutions to these challenges are then described (Section 5): - Scalable communications architecture - Data link - Designated UAS corridors - Crew planning for m:N operations - Flight route optimization - Traffic load-level control - Trajectory solutions with data link - Automated hazard avoidance for m:N operations - Traffic pattern integration (TPI) tool - Standard lost command and control (C2) link (LC2L) procedures - Automated hazard avoidance under LC2L - Auto-taxi, auto-takeoff, and auto-land - Ground control station (GCS) user interface for m:N operations The document attempts to link each of these solutions to one or more of the challenge areas. Novel solutions involving numerous automation technologies are needed to mitigate traffic and airspace management challenges, especially for realizing m:N operations and ensuring safety under LC2L conditions. The purpose of this document is to help understand alternatives and tradeoffs among potential solutions and provide a foundation for a cohesive PAAV concept that will be described and refined in subsequent concept versions.

Unmanned aircraft, uncrewed aircraft, regional air↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Initial Study of Tailored Trajectory Management for Multi-Vehicle Uncrewed Regional Air Cargo Operations

The primary contribution of this paper is an evaluation of the potential value of a tailored trajectory management (TTM) capability for uncrewed aircraft (UA) operators that is proactive in detecting conflicts and developing trajectory-based solutions for UA prior to air traffic control (ATC) performing conflict resolution. The experiment matrix is composed of one baseline simulation that models current air traffic operations without such a capability and four test simulations with different configurations of such a capability. In each simulation, five UA operations into Fort Worth Alliance airport were modeled in the presence of recorded tracks for about 4700 flights on January 18, 2022. The analysis focused on the extent to which such a capability was able to preclude an event that could spike UA operator workload. More specifically, in this study, the emulated UA operator TTM capability for multi-vehicle regional air cargo operations was able to reduce the number of instances of concurrent UA conflicts in the modeled ATC conflict resolution timeframe of 8 minutes or less from three to as low as one.

uncrewed aircraft, regional air cargo, tailored tr↗
NASA NTRS2017

Flight Test Evaluation of an Unmanned Aircraft System Traffic Management (UTM) Concept for Multiple Beyond-Visual-Line-of-Sight (BVLOS) Operations

Many applications of small Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) have been envisioned. These include surveillance of key assets such as pipelines, rail, or electric wires, deliveries, search and rescue, traffic monitoring, videography, and precision agriculture. These operations are likely to occur in the same airspace in the presence of many static and dynamic constraints such as airports, and high wind areas. Therefore, operations of small UAS need to be managed to ensure safety and operation efficiency is maintained. NASA has advanced a concept for UAS Traffic Management (UTM) and has initiated a research effort to refine that concept and develop operational and system requirements. A UTM research platform is in development and flight test activities to evaluate core functions and key assumptions focusing exclusively on UAS operations in different environments are underway. This seminar will present lessons learned from a recent flight test focused on enabling operations of multiple UAS in lower-risk environments within and beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS).

UTM↗
NASA NTRS2018

Performing a Comprehensive Unmanned Aircraft System Full Integration Analysis for NASA ARMD

For many years, the concept of routinely flying unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) within the national airspace system (NAS) has been a long-term goal with numerous known and unknown technology and policy obstacles. Just within the last few years, the efforts and advancements from government, industry, and academia-sponsored research and development have greatly shortened the distance to the goal. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) has recognized that it is uniquely positioned to play a lead role in addressing the remaining UAS airspace integration (AI) challenges. To fully understand the magnitude and scope of these challenges, NASA ARMD initiated a study in 2015 to identify what would be needed to enable full integration of UAS for civil/commercial operations within the NAS by 2025. The desired outcome was a comprehensive analysis framework that ARMD could use to develop a research portfolio focused on retiring the remaining gaps and challenges standing in the way of full UAS integration. This document is a comprehensive assessment of UAS integration research to date.

UAS in the NAS↗
NASA NTRS2020

Strategic Deconfliction Performance: Results and Analysis from the NASA UTM Technical Capability Level 4 Demonstration

Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM) refers to the service-based, cooperative approach to the management of small UAS in the National Airspace System that is safe, scalable, and fair. UTM provides the means to manage the airspace in a complementary manner that does not burden the current air traffic control workforce or infrastructure but allows the Air Navigation Service Provider to maintain its regulatory and operational authority of the airspace. A key feature of UTM is the ability to provide operators the means to strategically deconflict operations from others in the airspace through the digital exchange of information via supporting services. Through this approach, the four-dimensional operation volumes that encompass the intent of operators in a given area are discoverable and can be used for airspace awareness as well as planning conflict free operations that account for and avoid other operations. In certain cases, it is also possible to negotiate volume intersections for shared airspace use without the need to re-plan. In the NASA UTM concept, strategic deconfliction is the first layer of three in the overall conflict management model. The three layers of the conflict management model, which follow the International Civil Aviation Organization’s scheme [ICAO 2005] are: strategic conflict management, separate provision, and collision avoidance. In UTM, the strategic layer mostly occurs prior to departure, but is applicable to en route operations with sufficient planning horizon. The initial requirements for a strategic deconfliction capability within UTM are defined in a NASA publication [Rios 2018]. Within the concept and implementation of service-provided strategic deconfliction is the notion of priority. It is understood that there are instances in which an operation requires a priority designation within the UTM system and special handling accordingly to provide situation awareness and facilitate appropriate responses from other airspace users. Examples of situations requiring priority designation include: when an operator declares an emergency due to problems with the vehicle or its immediate surroundings; operations that are in support of certain organizations (e.g., public safety and first responders); or special missions that also require priority use of airspace (e.g., emergency medical deliveries). UAS Volume Reservations (UVRs) also relate to the topic of priority in the sense that the airspace that the volume encompasses has a different status or classification in which unassociated operations must vacate if inside, or avoid if outside, through strategic deconfliction with the volume. Operations that are specially permitted to access the UVR area are typically assigned priority status given the nature of their mission and their associated credentials. The ability to perform strategic deconfliction, handle certain operations with a priority distinction, and establish UVRs that are communicated throughout the UTM system, is predicated on an architecture that has been established through an evolutionary process in response to close collaboration with stakeholders from government and industry. Another important and influential aspect of these capabilities and architecture is the live, distributed flight tests that have been conducted across the Technical Capability Levels (TCLs) that culminated with a set of complex tests performed as part of TCL4 [Rios 2020]. The TCL4 flight test involved two FAA-designated UAS test sites building teams to collaborate with NASA’s UTM Project on the execution of several detailed, small UAS scenarios in urban environments.

conflict management↗
NASA NTRS2022

Applicability of Digital Flight to the Operations of Self-Piloted Unmanned Aircraft Systems in the National Airspace System

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) hold great promise for a new era of specialized missions, including personal air transportation, cargo flight operations, aerial surveys, inspections, firefighting and more. The anticipated market growth is significant. To unlock its scalability and incumbent benefits requires a human to oversee multiple flights simultaneously, focusing on multi-vehicle mission management and relinquishing to autonomous systems their active role in controlling the aircrafts’ flight paths. Key to the realization of these scalability benefits is minimally-encumbered access to the National Airspace System (NAS), which poses some unique challenges for self-piloted UAS aircraft operations. These include the requirement for compatibility with existing airspace structures and operations including Visual Flight Rules (VFR) and Instrument Flight Rules (IFR), neither of which were developed to accommodate the unique needs and capabilities of UAS. This paper explores the applicability of Digital Flight to the operations of self-piloted UAS. As proposed by NASA, Digital Flight is a flight operations capability, enabled by a set of cooperative procedures and digital technologies, in which flight operators ensure flight-path safety through automated separation and flight path management in lieu of visual procedures and Air Traffic Control separation services. Flights operating under potentially-forthcoming rules of Digital Flight employ advanced automation technologies, information sharing, connectivity to operational data, and cooperative behaviors through distributed decision-making to maintain safety and achieve mission objectives. Designed for integration with VFR and IFR operations in shared NAS airspace, potentially as a third set of flight rules, Digital Flight may provide the mechanism for UAS operators – and all aircraft operators – to scale and diversify their operations beyond what is achievable under current regulations.

DFR↗
NASA NTRS2024

m:N Working Group Meeting Summary November 2023

From November 28th to 30th, 2023 the m:N UAS working group and its subgroups [small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (sUAS), Large UAS, High Altitude Platform Systems (HAPS), and Urban Air Mobility (UAM)] met at the NASA Langley Research Center in Hampton, VA for an in person meeting. The subgroups meet multiple times throughout the year, virtually. Twice a year however, participants from all the subgroups come together in person to further identify and discuss challenges, and path forward ideas for incorporating UAS into the airspace. The m:N UAS working group is run by Jay Shively (Adaptive Aerospace) and Andy Thurling (Thurling Aero Consulting) and is comprised of members from government, industry, and academia in an effort to identify and reduce barriers to m:N operations. This effort also includes identifying requirements, use cases, and metrics to support organizations and groups including the FAA, RTCA, and ASTM. Each subgroup is run by a government/industry team (see below). sUAS Subgroup Garrett Sadler (NASA) Scott Scheff (HF Designworks) Large UAS Subgroup Conrad Rory (NASA) Brandon Suarez (Reliable Robotics) HAPS Subgroup Andy Thurling (Thurling Aero Consulting) Jeff Homola (NASA) UAM Subgroup Mike Politowicz (NASA) Scott Scheff (HF Designworks), member-at-large

m:N operations↗
NASA NTRS2024

Federal USS Synthesis Effort: 2023 Flight Test Report. A NASA and Department of Defense Joint Evaluation of Multi-Domain Airspace Integration

In recent years, advancements in technology have greatly improved the utility and applicability of Uncrewed Aircraft Systems (UAS) and have highlighted the need for and importance of UAS Traffic Management (UTM). Onboard sense and avoid systems, ground-based sensors, and long- range command and control (C2) systems have significantly expanded the possibilities for UAS beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS) operations. Initially, research on UTM flights focused on their interactions with other UTM operations, but that has since been expanded to include interactions with the flight profiles of Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) and upper Class E Traffic Management (ETM) operations. Recognizing the potential of these systems and the increase in UAS autonomy, the Department of Defense (DoD) is working towards integrating these missions and systems into a unified DoD Federal ecosystem. The Federal USS Synthesis Effort (FUSE) aims to develop a live system that can efficiently combine this wide range of UTM, AAM, and ETM systems, thus enabling expanded operations within a single common operating environment. The goal of the Federal USS Synthesis Effort (FUSE) is for NASA and the DoD to develop a live system that can efficiently combine UTM, AAM, and ETM systems. The most recent endeavor in this effort was a live flight test conducted near Grand Forks Air Force Base in June, 2023, where the FUSE ecosystem successfully demonstrated integrating UTM, AAM, and ETM operations while providing a single, shared COP to users. Additional investigations were made during the test, including assessing the usefulness of the system and its capability to support UAS weighing over 55 lbs.; testing user messaging capabilities and a DoD adaptation of a Federal USS; and assessing user workload, automated vs manual control, and the usability of NASA’s XTMClient.

Federal USS↗