UAS in the NAS
Shannon Gibson
Unmanned Systems, Module 4, Assignment
4.4
Embry Riddle Aeronautical University
How can the separation of unmanned aircraft be monitored and
maintained (among other unmanned aircraft and manned aircraft) in the National
Airspace System (NAS)? What considerations need to be made for varying sizes
(i.e., Group 1 to 5) and airframes of UAS (e.g., fixed-wing, rotary-wing, and
lighter than air)? What technology is currently employed by manned aircraft and
is it adaptable for use with unmanned?
Incorporating unmanned aircraft
systems (UAS) with manned aircraft systems is an ever-growing issues in the
regulation of aviation in the National Airspace System (NAS). First, to understand
that there are different groupings of UAS that fall into different categories,
we must understand some of their limitations. And second, we need to understand
how airspace is divided up; different rules in different classifications of
airspace. This also leads to several
other issues including air traffic control (ATC) abilities and limitations with
UAS and how the UAS/operator will communicate with ATC.
|
UAS Group
|
Maximum Weight
|
Nominal Operating
|
Representative UAS
|
|
|
Group 1
|
0 - 20
|
100
|
||
|
Group 2
|
21 - 55
|
< 250
|
||
|
Group 3
|
< 1320
|
|||
|
Group 4
|
> 1320
|
Any airspeed
|
||
|
Group 5
|
Federal Aviation Administration - FAA Aeronautical
Information Manual, Chapter
Incorporating all of the variables
such as; type UAS, characteristics and limitations of UAS, mission/purpose,
route and payloads, the Federal Aviation Administration can then start to write
regulations to incorporate the flight of UAS in the NAS. This is not so easy
however, a small UAS (sUAS), or a Group 1 UAS, typically operates at
approximately 1200ft and 100kts, knowing this, we certainly wouldn’t write
rules for a sUAS to fly in Class A Airspace. However, looking at Classes D, G, C and B, it
would be possible in respects to altitude. However, if we would like to launch
and recover a sUAS in Class D Airspace, we would need to have procedures for
separation, transfer of ATC control, lost-link and emergency procedures.
The sUAS example above is a
relatively miniscule example of a larger problem. UAS’s vary so broadly in
their characteristics and limitations, it is difficult to take them all into
account. Having regulation of UAS into
the NAS would have to include the capabilities such as the ability to squawk
(transponder), anti-collision lighting, communications and frequency
distribution aligned with the associated airspaces and facilities, ability to
communicate seamlessly with ATC and numerous other factors.
Current technology that can cross
from manned aircraft to some UAS’s is the ability to squawk an assigned code;
this allowed both pilots and ATC to identify a target operating in the same
area. Unfortunately, not all systems have this ability nor can support the
weight and size of a transponder as an additional payload. Also, the size of
the UAS can limit the payload ability in that it can be difficult or
nonexistent to pick up a primary target on a radarscope for the smaller UAS’s.
If some cannot be seen via radar, and a controller cannot or has a difficult
time visually locating them, they must have strict rules to allow flight. For
this to work, non-radar procedures can cover this. Non-radar procedures use
minutes and miles to determine the location of an aircraft. This isn’t without
its own concerns thought. Without a human in the cockpit, we’d have to rely on
an operator on the ground that also cannot always visually locate the UAS, the
operator can only rely on the system readings and programmed route.
There isn’t any one answer to solve
all the issues with the integration of UAS in the NAS. Safety concerns are the
number one concern that ensures there will be a long delay in the
incorporation. I believe building airports specifically for the flight of UAS
as well as routes strictly for them as well may be an answer, although the cost
of this would be incredible.
References:
Department of Defense. Unmanned Aircraft System Airspace
Integration Plan. Version 2.0. (March,
2011). UAS Task Force Airspace
Integration Integrated Product Team. Retrieved from
FAA - Federal Aviation Administration - FAA Aeronautical
Information Manual, Chapter 3, Section
No comments:
Post a Comment