Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “NaS”

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 973 records · Page 54

Ground Risk Assessment Service Provider (GRASP) Development Effort as a Supplemental Data Service Provider (SDSP) for Urban Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Operations

NASA’s Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM) project aims to enable the integration of new aviation paradigms such as Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) while providing the necessary infrastructure for future concepts such as On-Demand Mobility (ODM) and Urban Air Mobility (UAM) operations in the National Airspace System (NAS). In order to do so, the UTM project has developed an architecture to allow communication among UAS operators, UAS Service Suppliers (USS), Air Navigation Service Providers (ANSP), and the public. As part of this framework, the Supplemental Data Service Providers (SDSP) are envisioned as model and/or data based services that disseminate essential or enhanced information to ensure safe operations within low-altitude airspace. These services include terrain and obstacle data, specialized weather data, surveillance, constraint information, risk monitoring, etc. This paper highlights the development efforts of a non-participant casualty risk assessment SDSP called Ground Risk Assessment Service Provider (GRASP) which assists operators with preflight planning. GRASP is based on the previously introduced UTM Risk Assessment Framework (URAF) and allows UAS operators to simulate and visualize potential non-participant casualty risks associated with their proposed flight. The risk assessment capability also allows operators to revise their flight plans if the casualty risks are determined to be above acceptable thresholds. GRASP is configured to account for future improvements including servicing airborne aircraft as part of NASA’s System-Wide Safety (SWS) project.

Ancel, Ersin↗

TPSAS-NF1676L-18493-DND

The Air Traffic Operations Lab is a multi-fidelity, part-task, aircraft and air traffic operations simulation facility. Used to explore interactions between new airborne and ground-based tools in a NextGeneration ATC environment, including: - Concept-level flight operations research, looking at human decision making, situation awareness, transfer of authority/responsibility, etc. - Performance impact assessments of new operational concepts on the National Airspace System (NAS) - Rapid prototyping of new flight deck tools and automation - Concept-level safety assessments - Identification and evaluation of future communication, navigation, and surveillance (CNS) infrastructure requirements - Controller-pilot data link - Precision trajectory-based ops - Air-to-air data exchange

Michael T Palmer↗

Enabling Execution of a Legacy CFD Mini Application on Accelerators Using OpenMP

We describe the process and outcome of our efforts to port a legacy Fortran benchmark code to heterogeneous GPU-accelerated computing architectures using OpenMP. The benchmark code is one of the multi-zone NAS Parallel Benchmarks (NPB-MZ) called SP-MZ. This “mini-app” mimics the computation and data movement that is found in popular legacy and modern implicit computational fluid dynamics (CFD)solvers. Our objective was to examine how efficiently legacy Fortran codes can be ported to accelerators by leveraging OpenMP directives. We describe the development and optimization process and demonstrate the performance impact of various code modifications. We show select profiling results from the Nvidia nvvp profiler to help others diagnose and overcome performance issues in their own applications. We present results for two compute systems endowed with Nvidia V100 accelerators.

Ioannis Nompelis↗

An Examination of Two Non-Cooperative Detect and Avoid Well Clear Definitions

NASA’s Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration into the National Airspace System (UAS in the NAS) project examines the technical barriers associated with the operation of UAS in civil airspace. The present study explored the differential effects of two candidate non-cooperative Detect-and-Avoid Well Clear (DWC)definitions on pilot and system performance in a human-in-the-loop simulation. Active-duty UAS pilots were recruited to maintain DWC against representative Class 4 encounter types with a low size, weight, and power (SWaP) radar declaration range of 3.5 nautical miles (nmi). Objective performance indicated that pilots could consistently maintain DWC against non-cooperative intruders with either DWC candidate, with negligible differences in response times and separation performance against caution and warning-level threats. While losses of DWC were avoided at rates comparable to Phase 1 findings, pilots uploaded their responses to caution-level alerts over 5 seconds faster in the current setup relative to Phase 1. Encounters with faster closure rates were susceptible to shortened caution-level alert durations, especially when employing the DWC criterion with the additional ‘Tau’ (temporal) component. Consequently, caution-level threats frequently elevated to warning-level status (nearly twice as often with theTau candidate). The variable caution alert durations appeared to impact pilots’ coordination with air traffic control (ATC), as ATC approval rates were lower with the ‘Tau’and ‘Disc’ candidates relative to Phase 1 research. Ultimately, the increased alerting time enabled by the Disc candidate deemed it more suitable for any reductions to the assumed radar declaration range requirement, which was re-evaluated in a follow-on study. Findings from this study will inform Phase 2 Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS)development for UAS with alternative surveillance equipment and performance capabilities.

Kevin J Monk↗

Display and Automation Considerations for the Airborne Collision Avoidance System Xu

In this paper we examine several display and automation considerations of a collision avoidance system that is currently under development: the Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS) Xu. This study builds on previous work conducted as part of NASA’s Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Integration into the National Airspace System (NAS) project. ACAS Xu represents the next-generation successor to the Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS II), wherein the Xu variant is intended for UAS applications. Whereas TCAS II exclusively issues RAs in the vertical dimension, a major distinction between ACAS Xu and previous collision avoidance (CA) systems is the introduction of horizontal and “blended” RAs (i.e., RAs with both horizontal and vertical components). This present work was conducted as an engineering analysis involving two parts. In Part 1, a two-by-two, within-subjects study was performed that manipulated how RAs were presented to a pilot situated at a UAS ground control station. Five participants experienced four experimental trials in which text and aural alerting characteristics were manipulated. In Part 2, another five participants experienced four trials in which the levels of automation were manipulated with regard to the CA and return-to-course (RTC) tasks. The results for Part 1 found no effect of display or alerting configuration on pilot performance. However, it was discovered that pilot response time to RAs greatly depended on the RA type. In particular, pilots were quicker to respond to vertical RAs (M = 4.52 seconds) than horizontal (M = 7.42 seconds) and blended (M = 9.68 seconds) RAs in which both dimensions were issued simultaneously. For Part 2 of the study, pilots found both auto-CA and auto-RTC functions equally useful. Most pilots were comfortable with the automation, however responses were mixed. Three of five participants indicated high levels of comfort with the auto-CA function, while two rated their comfort as low. Pilots’ comfort for the auto-RTC functionality was slightly higher: four out of five pilots gave high ratings, while one pilot gave a low rating. Overall, pilots ordinally ranked their preference for automated functions as auto-CA together with auto-RTC (when an aural alert announces a change between CA and RTC states), auto-CA, and auto-CA and RTC (without the aural state-change announcement). Recommendations for improving the display of automation are also discussed.

collision avoidance↗

A Distributed Simulation-to-Flight Framework to Support Investigating Trust/Trustworthiness in Multi-Agent Systems

As autonomous systems continue to grow both in use and complexity, the necessity for robust and extensible simulation-to-flight frameworks is paramount for establishing an effective architecture for autonomous systems. Hardware test flights are time-consuming and cost prohibitive during early system design and development. Simulation environments can be useful tools to accelerate algorithm development and testing. However, transitions from simulation to flight (sim-to-flight) can be challenging, unless systems are designed with this transition in mind and with the necessary capabilities built into the architecture and framework. One of the objectives of Autonomy Teaming and TRAjectories for Complex Trusted Operational Reliability (ATTRACTOR) was to design and develop a distributed mixed-reality simulation environment to begin establishing a basis for certification of autonomous systems via research into trust and trustworthiness. ATTRACTOR’s objective was to construct computational concepts of trustworthiness and justifiable trust in multi-agent autonomous teams, to inform future certification of safety-critical and time-critical autonomous systems in aviation. In this paper, we present an autonomous systems architecture and development framework paired with a persistent distributed modeling and simulation (ModSim) environment for test and evaluation of autonomous systems. They were designed under ATTRACTOR in order to measure and establish trustworthiness and trust in single-and multi-agent human-machine systems whether these machines are fixed-wing general aviation, rotary-wing Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), ground rovers, or even spacecraft. The Autonomous Entity Operational Network (AEON) framework enables autonomous system development with an easily extensible collection of libraries and plug-n-play nodes facilitated by the Data Distribution Service (DDS) communication protocol standard. The Baseline Environment for Autonomous Modeling (BEAM) simulation environment is a distributed mixed-reality Unity™-based environment built around the same DDS communication paradigm allowing for easy integration with AEON-based autonomous applications, enabling sim-to-flight with minimal configuration changes. Using AEON and BEAM, source code that runs in simulation ports directly to hardware and has successfully flown in the National Airspace System (NAS) at NASA LaRC many times over the lifetime of ATTRACTOR.

Benjamin N Kelley↗

Demonstrating the Early Adopter Benefits of Submitting Multiple Trajectory Options for Airlines

Integrated Demand Management (IDM), is a NASA developed Traffic Flow Management (TFM) concept that uses Collaborative Trajectory Options Program (CTOP) to precondition traffic flows into the Time Based Flow Management (TBFM) region, helping traffic planners manage imbalances between demand and capacity in the National Airspace (NAS). A workshop held at NASA was conducted to demonstrate how individual airlines can be impacted by using Trajectory Options Sets (TOS) during IDM operations. A primary concern that was specifically addressed in a part-task Human-in-the-Loop simulation was who received the greater benefit, TOS participating or non-TOS participating airlines? The results showed that TOS participating airlines received greater benefit in terms of ground delay, number of reroute options, and additional flight time, than non-TOS participating airlines. However, this result was dependent on the number and location of flights. Therefore, it was advantageous for airlines to equip TOS. In addition, we found that non-TOS participating airlines also benefitted from other airlines participating in TOS, because the total system-wide ground delay was reduced as more TOS were introduced into the system. The evidence suggests that the benefits were distributed fairly, and there were no unfair disadvantages for airlines who did not equip TOS.

Integrated Demand Management↗

Display and Automation Considerations for the Airborne Collision Avoidance System Xu

In this presentation we examine several display and automation considerations of a collision avoidance system that is currently under development: the Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS) Xu. This study builds on previous work conducted as part of NASA’s Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Integration into the National Airspace System (NAS) project. ACAS Xu represents the next-generation successor to the Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS II), wherein the Xu variant is intended for UAS applications. Whereas TCAS II exclusively issues RAs in the vertical dimension, a major distinction between ACAS Xu and previous collision avoidance (CA) systems is the introduction of horizontal and “blended” RAs (i.e., RAs with both horizontal and vertical components). This present work was conducted as an engineering analysis involving two parts. In Part 1, a two-by-two, within-subjects study was performed that manipulated how RAs were presented to a pilot situated at a UAS ground control station. Five participants experienced four experimental trials in which text and aural alerting characteristics were manipulated. In Part 2, another five participants experienced four trials in which the levels of automation were manipulated with regard to the CA and return-to-course (RTC) tasks. The results for Part 1 found no effect of display or alerting configuration on pilot performance. However, it was discovered that pilot response time to RAs greatly depended on the RA type. In particular, pilots were quicker to respond to vertical RAs (M = 4.52 seconds) than horizontal (M = 7.42 seconds) and blended (M = 9.68 seconds) RAs in which both dimensions were issued simultaneously. For Part 2 of the study, pilots found both auto-CA and auto-RTC functions equally useful. Most pilots were comfortable with the automation, however responses were mixed. Three of five participants indicated high levels of comfort with the auto-CA function, while two rated their comfort as low. Pilots’ comfort for the auto-RTC functionality was slightly higher: four out of five pilots gave high ratings, while one pilot gave a low rating. Overall, pilots ordinally ranked their preference for automated functions as auto-CA together with auto-RTC (when an aural alert announces a change between CA and RTC states), auto-CA, and auto-CA and RTC (without the aural state-change announcement). Recommendations for improving the display of automation are also discussed.

collision avoidance↗

A Concept of Operations (ConOps) of an In-time Aviation Safety Management System (IASMS) for Advanced Air Mobility (AAM)

The growth of new emerging operations involving Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) necessitates developing a perspective for an In-time Aviation Safety Management System (IASMS). This perspective advances from the National Academies report on IASMS and its recommendation for developing a Concept of Operations (ConOps) for IASMS. A ConOps has been developed for In-time System-Wide Safety Assurance (ISSA) from which the IASMS ConOps pivots to provide a robust scope commensurate with the broad vision defined by the National Academies. The IASMS ConOps focuses on emerging operations and spans innovations in Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) and an increasingly complex ecosystem comprised of a widening mix of vehicles and technologies, Urban Air Mobility (UAM) with industry-federated services, traditional operations, as well as new supersonic aircraft and space launch systems.The challenge for the IASMS ConOps is to be broad to encompass innovations in the coming years and decades while agile to ensure levels of safety compatible with operational and certification requirements of the National Airspace System (NAS). The IASMS ConOps interweaves increasing complexity of operational safety capabilities and unlocking UAS Maturity Levels (UMLs). The relationships between increased complexity of automation and automated systems, fewer operators who are not as traditionally higher skilled, more complex operational environments, and aviation operations management with mixed aircraft and equipage pose a multi-dimensional space for IASMS capabilities essential for safety assurance and risk management. Instantiating IASMS capabilities and how they would be integral to AAM operations and increasing maturity of UAM could be accomplished through a series of Safety Demonstrators. These Safety Demonstrators could provide increased understanding and insight into use of controls for risk mitigation, means of compliance for certification, and operational experience with safety services such as in relation to contingency management. The IASMS capabilities can be viewed as initially residing with the vehicle, airspace, and Supplemental Data Service Provider (SDSP). For example, vehicle capabilities include communications including the command and control link, Remote Identification (ID), conflict advisory/alerting, and UAS system monitoring. These capabilities monitor and assess data such as battery health, aircraft state, and human performance. Complexity of ISAMS capabilities depends on a number of factors. These factors are intendedonly as a notional categorization with the purpose being to reflect the complexity of the AAM ecosystem that would drive up the complexity of ISSA capabilities including systems, sensors, models, standards, and controls. Factors could include the Vehicle Flight Management, Environment, Airspace, and Contingency Management. Each of these factors can be comprised of multiple sub-factors that contribute to increasing complexity. For example, Airspace at a lower level of complexity could be dedicated to UTM operations that are unmonitored, and at a higher level of complexity could involve mixed UTM and ATM operations. The IASMS concept includes safety services that provide data and information to different participants in AAM. The roles and responsibilities of participants can be defined using the Responsible-Accountable-Consulted-Informed (RACI) analysis. For example, for the safety service involving the Remote ID, the Operator would be accountable for providing the data, the Vehicle would be responsible for transmitting it, and the USS, SDSP, Vertiports, FIMS (FAA), and Public Entities such as safety services would be informed by receiving the data. The IASMS ConOps identifies the capabilities needed for risk mitigation and safety assurance in the increasingly complex national airspace. The ConOps serves as a pathway for engaging with industry to gain operational experience including through the Safety Demonstrator series, the RACI analysis, and operational complexity factors. The ConOps serves to integrate these different perspectives to build a cohesive and cogent approach to an AAM safety management system.

In-Time Aviation Safety Management System↗

Lessons Learned: Using UTM Paradigm for Urban Air Mobility

Urban Air Mobility (UAM) aims to reduce congestion on the roads and highways by offering air taxi as an alternative to driving on surface roads. Integration of UAM operations in the National Airspace System (NAS) has been the focus of the research conducted at NASA Ames Research Center. A simulation was performed in collaboration with Uber Technologies Inc to investigate if NASA’s UTM architecture and its implementation as demonstrated in the 2019 UTM field tests were extensible for UAM operations, and if the data exchange between multiple operators as planned under UTM were adequate for UAM operations in the shared airspace. In order to explore these research questions, three Use Cases were defined to investigate different airspace management challenges. This paper will describe the lessons learned from exercising the uses cases and the airspace management services including scheduling and separation developed to facilitate initial UAM operations.

Urban Air Mobility↗

Surface Meets TOS Update & Potential Future Work

This briefing for the Surface CDM (Collaborative Decision Making) Team (SCT) & Flow Evaluation Team (FET) discussed the foundational data/information quality needs to enable a collaborative TOS concept that includes surface. The primary goal of this briefing was on soliciting broad feedback from the operator community. This discusses the importance of the Earliest Off Block Time (EOBT) as a predictor for improving NAS demand predictions as well as possible areas where SCT/FET could contribute to uses of Trajectory Option Sets in future FAA systems.

ATD-2, IADS, SCT/FET↗

Design and Implementation of a Scenario Development Process for a 2040 Trajectory-Based Operations Simulation

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is supporting research to transition from a legacy, air traffic management (ATM) system to Trajectory-Based Operations (TBO) environment targeting the 2035-2045 timeframe by creating simulation scenarios for current and future studies. TBO in the National Airspace System (NAS) focuses on modernizing the current operating paradigm to increase efficiency, predictability, resilience, and flexibility while migrating toward greater operational autonomy across the airspace. These simulation scenarios offer a wide dissemination and use of system-level constraints and aircraft state/intent data, routine use of data communications to request complex trajectory modifications and to receive clearances, and aircraft that are flying on 4-D trajectories with flexibility when desired, but structure where required. This report describes the end-to-end development of scenarios for the NASA Langley Research Center simulation environment to represent a 2040 Trajectory-Based Operations airspace for air transport operations research.

Trajectory-Based Operations↗

Lessons Learned: Using UTM paradigm for Urban Air Mobility Operations

Urban Air Mobility (UAM) aims to reduce congestion on the roads and highways by offering air taxi as an alternative to driving on surface roads. Integration of UAM operations in the National Airspace System (NAS) has been the focus of the research conducted at NASA Ames Research Center. A simulation was performed in collaboration with Uber Technologies Inc to investigate if NASA’s UTM architecture and its implementation as demonstrated in the 2019 UTM field tests were extensible for UAM operations, and if the data exchange between multiple operators as planned under UTM were adequate for UAM operations in the shared airspace. In order to explore these research questions, three Use Cases were defined to investigate different airspace management challenges. This paper will describe the lessons learned from exercising the uses cases and the airspace management services including scheduling and separation developed to facilitate initial UAM operations.

Urban Air Mobility↗

UAS Pilot Assessments of Display and Alerting for the Airborne Collision Avoidance System XU

Unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) must comply with specific standards to operate in the National Airspace System (NAS). Among the requirements are the detect and avoid (DAA) capabilities, which include display, alerting, and guidance specifications. Previous studies have queried pilots for their subjective feedback on these display elements on earlier systems; the present study sought pilot evaluations with an initial iteration of the unmanned variant of a Next Generation Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS XU). Sixteen participants piloted simulated aircraft with both standalone and integrated DAA displays. Their opinions were gathered using post-block and post-simulation questionnaires as well as guided debriefs. The data showed pilots had better understanding and comfort with the system when using an integrated display. Pilots also rated ACAS Xu alerting and guidance as generally acceptable and effective. Implications for further development of ACAS XU and DAA displays are discussed.

unmanned aircraft systems↗

UAS Pilot Assessments of Display and Alerting for the Next Generation Airborne Avoidance System

Unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) must comply with specific standards to operate in the National Airspace System (NAS). Among the requirements are the detect and avoid (DAA) capabilities, which include display, alerting, and guidance specifications. Previous studies have queried pilots for their subjective feedback on these display elements on earlier systems; the present study sought pilot evaluations with an initial iteration of the unmanned variant of a Next Generation Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS XU). Sixteen participants piloted simulated aircraft with both standalone and integrated DAA displays. Their opinions were gathered using post-block and post-simulation questionnaires as well as guided debriefs. The data showed pilots had better understanding and comfort with the system when using an integrated display. Pilots also rated ACAS Xu alerting and guidance as generally acceptable and effective. Implications for further development of ACAS XU and DAA displays are discussed.

unmanned aircraft systems↗

UAS Pilot Assessments of Display and Alerting for the Next Generation Airborne Collision Avoidance System Xu

Unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) must comply with specific standards to operate in the National Airspace System (NAS). Among the requirements are the detect and avoid (DAA) capabilities, which include display, alerting, and guidance specifications. Previous studies have queried pilots for their subjective feedback on these display elements on earlier systems; the present study sought pilot evaluations with an initial iteration of the unmanned variant of a Next Generation Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS XU). Sixteen participants piloted simulated aircraft with both standalone and integrated DAA displays. Their opinions were gathered using post-block and post-simulation questionnaires as well as guided debriefs. The data showed pilots had better understanding and comfort with the system when using an integrated display. Pilots also rated ACAS Xu alerting and guidance as generally acceptable and effective. Implications for further development of ACAS XU and DAA displays are discussed.

unmanned aircraft systems↗

A Distributed Simulation-to-Flight Framework to Support Investigating Trust/Trustworthiness in Multi-Agent Systems

As autonomous systems continue to grow both in use and complexity, the necessity for robust and extensible simulation-to-flight methods is paramount for establishing an effective architecture for autonomous systems. A fundamental objective of the ATTRACTOR (Autonomy Teaming and TRAjectories for Complex Trusted Operational Reliability) project was to design and develop a distributed mixed-reality simulation environment to begin establishing a basis for certification of autonomous systems via research into trust and trustworthiness. In this paper, we present an autonomous systems architecture and development framework paired with a persistent distributed modeling and simulation environment for test and evaluation of autonomous systems. The Autonomous Entity Operations Network (AEON) framework enables autonomous system development with an easily extensible collection of libraries and plug-n-play nodes facilitated by the Data Distribution Service (DDS) communication protocol standard. The Baseline Environment for Autonomous Modeling (BEAM) simulation environment is a distributed mixed-reality Unity™-based environment built around the same DDS communication paradigm allowing for easy integration with AEON-based autonomous applications. They were designed under ATTRACTOR in order to measure and establish trustworthiness and trust in single- and multi-agent human-machine systems whether these machines are fixed-wing general aviation, rotary-wing Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), ground rovers, or even spacecraft. Together AEON and BEAM enable sim-to-flight with minimal configuration changes. By using AEON and BEAM, source code that runs in simulation ports directly to hardware and has successfully flown in the lab and in the National Airspace System (NAS) at NASA LaRC many times over the lifetime of ATTRACTOR.

Benjamin N Kelley↗

UAM Vision Concept of Operations (ConOps) UAM Maturity Level (UML) 4

This Vision ConOps is intended as a foundation to engage members of the UAM community and provide a consensus on the future vision of UAM operations. It provides a concept for more detailed discussion and a basis for the exploration of ideas using a common framework to inform the continued development and integration of UAM as part of the broader transportation system. Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) encompasses a range of innovative aviation technologies (small drones, electric aircraft, automated air traffic management, etc.) that are transforming aviation’s role in everyday life, including the movement of goods and people. Urban Air Mobility (UAM) represents one of the most exciting and complex AAM concepts with highly automated aircraft, providing commercial services to the public over densely populated cities. This concept has generated tremendous interest and industry investment. UAM envisages a future in which advanced technologies and new operational procedures enable practical, cost-effective air travel as an integral mode of transportation in metropolitan areas. It represents one of the most exciting and complex AAM concepts with highly automated aircraft providing commercial services to the public over densely populated cities. For this reason, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) selected UAM as the initial goal of its AAM efforts and the focus of this Vision Concept of Operations (ConOps) document. UAM Community Vision ConOps: This Vision ConOps effort was led by experts from NASA’s Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) in collaboration with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Deloitte’s Ecosystem Advisory Group (a cohort of advisers with aviation, aerospace, and regulatory expertise). To develop this Vision ConOps, NASA, FAA, and Deloitte built upon the current body of aeronautical research and consulted with more than 100 stakeholder organizations. This UAM community includes entities ranging from legacy aviation leaders to innovators and new market entrants. Stakeholders consulted included the federal government, state and local government, aerospace original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), local transportation organizations, prospective UAM operators, academia, industry standards-setting bodies, airports, service suppliers, and others (as described in Appendix G). This input was captured through the following methods: • A series of more than two dozen interviews with industry experts, federal regulators, state and local governments, and industry trade groups provided insight into the challenges of UAM integration into the National Airspace System (NAS), as well as technology developments and a variety of perspectives as to how UAM systems will integrate. • A series of two-day community workshops enabling active, detailed engagement of nearly 100 industry, academic, federal, and state stakeholder individuals. These workshops, hosted by NASA and Deloitte, explored UAM concepts in detail, and stakeholders were invited to collaboratively analyze and propose solutions to some of the greatest conceptual challenges behind UAM at an intermediate state. • A review of more than 160 sources of UAM literature from across government, industry, and academia, which are listed in Appendix H. • The public sharing of workshop input and document drafts for review and input across the UAM community. Feedback in the form of more than 1,000 comments and inputs on the document was received from industry groups, individual companies, academia, and government (federal, state, and local), among others. Although effort was made to incorporate inputs from across the UAM stakeholder group, not all comments could ultimately be incorporated in this version. The team resolved conflicting comments or ideas while maintaining consistency with the known direction of regulators and ensuring the document was coherent and consistent. It is recognized that this is a rapidly evolving area and that concepts will likely change over time; as such, this Vision ConOps is a living document and is expected to evolve as concepts mature. The ConOps does, however, provide a vision of UAM concepts and solutions based on the broad insights from across the UAM stakeholder community at the time of its publication and is intended to serve as a UAM North Star for continued research and development of UAM. As a broad Vision ConOps, is not a detailed engineering document; rather, it focuses primarily on outlining a broad, high-level vision across all aspects of a UAM transportation system.

Urban Air Mobility↗