Low Level RPAS Traffic Identification and Management Milano, July 2017 Low Level RPAS Traffic Identification and Management C. Le Tallec, P. Le Blaye

RPAS Traffic Management Motivations Market opportunities and expected benefits of small RPAS operations below 500 feet AGL (VLL), in Visual Line of Sight & Beyond VLOS © SNCF Railway & powerline inspection Aerial firefighting & SAR operations Agriculture & parcel delivery Potential exponential growth of RPAS low level flights in many types of location, in various classes of airspace

RPAS Traffic Management Motivations The VLL airspace is also used by many manned aircraft…

SAFETY The LLRTM project A 3-year project to: Develop and to demonstrate an integrated system for the management of RPAS operations below 500 feet in uncontrolled airspace (classes F-G) using a combination of solutions: Airborne cooperative devices Ground sensor to detect cooperative and non-cooperative traffic Connection to existing networks on the Internet Define CONOPS and design HMI for 2 human roles: Remote Pilots (RP) RPAS Traffic Manager(s) (RTM) SAFETY The role of the RTM would be to manage the RPAS traffic, ie: 1) watch the global traffic 2) alert the remote pilots of incoming manned traffic and 3) coordinate multi RPAS operations Funding Consortium 4 4

RPAS Traffic Identification motivations Enforce compliance with existing flight regulations (no fly zones, max flight altitudes) Defense of sensitive buildings and infrastructures Deny illegal photography Protect people gatherings Protect civil security & safety emergency operations… Nuclear power plant Sensitives locations Crowd protection

SECURITY The LLRTId extension The LLRTM project has been extended (LLRTId ) to satisfy the legal requirements for mandatory RPAS identification Use a combination of solutions similar to the LLRTM ones: Airborne cooperative devices, but simplified to only report position and identification Ground sensor to detect adequately equipped RPAs Connection to existing surveillance networks on the Internet Define CONOPS and design HMI for 2 human roles: Sensitive area managers (Fixed stations for situation awareness) Police officers (Mobile stations for surveillance and law enforcement) SECURITY The role of the RTM would be to manage the RPAS traffic, ie: 1) watch the global traffic 2) alert the remote pilots of incoming manned traffic and 3) coordinate multi RPAS operations Funding Consortium 6 6

Flight safety issues and potential solutions Problem statement: Remote pilots compliance with RoA without being on board is especially challenging (“See and avoid” ) Pilots of manned aircraft may not be able to see and avoid small RPAs (conspicuity issue) Current consensus is that RPAs should remain clear of manned a/c (RWC) (e.g. French CAA 2015, Eurocontrol RPAS CONOPS 2017) The following assumptions are also made: - It is not acceptable to mandate any additional equipment to legacy users in order to accommodate RPAS at low altitude - It is not acceptable to deny the use of the VLL airspace to legacy users

Flight safety issues and potential solutions Potential technical solutions to RWC : Equip small RPAs with an onboard Detect & Avoid system   Airspace segregation: creation of corridors or layers for RPAS exclusive use  Transfer the D&A function to the ground (GBDAA) by providing remotes pilot and RPAS traffic managers (RTM) with all traffic information to enable RPAs to remain well clear of all manned traffic The following assumptions are also made: - It is not acceptable to mandate any additional equipment to legacy users in order to accommodate RPAS at low altitude - It is not acceptable to deny the use of the VLL airspace to legacy users

Flight security issues and potential solutions Problem statement: RPAS can be used illegally: Voluntarily By mistake or ignorance of flight restrictions Law enforcement is not easy if the drone is not identified Registration of any flying RPA is difficult to check Lack of objective RPAS traffic information for security analysis (building a data base of RPAS flights, identification of “unusual” behavior…) The following assumptions are also made: - It is not acceptable to mandate any additional equipment to legacy users in order to accommodate RPAS at low altitude - It is not acceptable to deny the use of the VLL airspace to legacy users

Flight safety issues and potential solutions Potential technical solutions to the Id mandate : Equip the small RPA with an onboard identification and tracking system Makes the capability of this system extendable for D&A Makes the overall system affordable thanks to mass production of the various sub-systems made with off-the-shelf components (both on board and on ground)    The following assumptions are also made: - It is not acceptable to mandate any additional equipment to legacy users in order to accommodate RPAS at low altitude - It is not acceptable to deny the use of the VLL airspace to legacy users

Strategic level of the LLRTM CONOPS RPAS vs manned A/C RPA flights below 500 ft. Mandatory flight declaration Global traffic awareness using web services RPAS vs RPAS => Strategic deconfliction Semi-circular rule for vertical separation Trajectory planning, possibly with 4D contracts

RPA/RPA conflict probability issue Lower the probability of RPA/RPA head-on conflict Semi-circular rule below 500ft for RPAs Issues: Flight altitude reference Vertical navigation accuracy 500 ft AGL limit Manned traffic safety buffer zone limit East-bound (EB) flying zone EB / WB 4D buffer zone West-bound (WB) flying zone Terrain safety buffer zone limit 50 ft 175 ft 50 ft 500 ft 175 ft 50 ft Ground Sea

Infrastructure manager LLRTIM architecture optional Police officer Infrastructure manager PO 13

Functional architecture and levels of automation Low High Low High Low High Levels of automation

Candidate technologies for onboard identification devices New needs, no legacy system Cellular networks (GSM, GPRS..): coverage issues and technology not yet proven for aeronautical usage Adapted FLARM (Flight Alarm): Transmit the a/c identification and GPS position at regular time intervals under a coded radio protocol (868 MHz) Over 30.000 FLARMs already equip gliders, GA aircraft, some police and medical rotorcraft will receive the information Not certified.. but designed by electronic industry standards and providing safety benefits as acknowledged by EASA and FAA Existing network of ground receivers and web services (OGN) NB: For commercial reasons, only PowerFLARM is approved for use in the US and Canada, using the a different frequency band (902.2-927.8 MHz) .

Candidate technologies for onboard traffic awareness and collision avoidance devices Needs for traffic awareness & collision avoidance between aircraft is not new, legacy systems already exist Transponders 1090ES, ADS-B TCAS FLARM (Flight Alarm): Complement the identification device with the functionalities of the conventional FLARM Traffic awareness and alert devices based on a concept patented by ONERA in 1998, initially designed for glider pilots Transmit and receive the a/c identification and GPS position at regular time intervals under a coded radio protocol (868 MHz) ‘PowerFLARM’ extended to receive ADS-B and transponders Existing network of ground receivers and web services (OGN) NB: For commercial reasons, only PowerFLARM is approved for use in the US and Canada, using the a different frequency band (902.2-927.8 MHz) .

The existing network of ground receivers (OGN)

Available information on © OGN Normal mode Aircraft Id Transmitter Id Aircrat model (as stored in the OGN data base) « Stealth » mode Only position and aircraft type are shown

Global situation awareness and local RPAS traffic management: LLRTM Global view (Internet OGN) Large coverage Situation awareness Local view (LLRTM GS) Accurate and real time Assistance for RWC

Global situation awareness and local RPAS traffic surveilllance: LLRTId Global view (Internet OGN) Large coverage Large area surveillance Local view (LLRTId GS) Accurate and real time Assistance for law enforcement

LLRTM preliminary testing (07/2016) One RPAS vs one intruder (VLA) in various encounter conditions Focus on the detection range, signal acquisition and stability

LLRTId Demo flights for remote Id (03/2017) Ident. and tracking of three drones at distances up to 1 km High gain antenna for extended range HMI improvements and adaptation LLRTM presentation to JARUS, May 18, 2017

Planned tests of the LLRTM system Support of the Remote Pilot for D&A Involving tow planes on the airfield of Salon AFB Focus on traffic alerting, timing and avoidance strategy https://www.suasnews.com/2016/12/dpdgroup-drone-delivers-parcels-using-regular-commercial-line/ Support for BVLOS operations Drone on the first commercial parcel delivery line (> 20 km distance) Involving helicopter(s), VLA and drone intruders

Research questions Human roles and HSI To which extent and how should the remote pilot (RP) be kept in the loop? Separation & traffic avoidance: RP in the loop? Collision avoidance: RP on the loop, then automated? What should be the role of the RPAS traffic manager (RTM)? How and when should the RTM coordinate with the remote pilots? How many RPAS could be actually managed simultaneously? What should be the requirements for HMI design, standardization, integration and validation?

Research questions Regulatory basis What are the appropriate protection volumes and time thresholds not to scare the pilots of manned a/c? Should they depend on the type of RPA? on the type of operation? What about transition between LLRTM and ATM? Architecture, technologies, algorithms, software What is the appropriate allocation of functions (air-ground and human-machine) to insure the required level of safety? What are the sensors and equipment to be used on ground and onboard the RPA? Which communication links and frequencies should be used? Navigation at low altitude AGL (accuracy, terrain and obstacles),

Thank you for your attention Conclusion The increase of RPAS VLL operations requires efforts from the whole community to complement the regulation and to design systems to integrate these new users of the airspace, taking into account safety and security issues LLRTIM (LLRTM & LLRTId) provides a solution for for RPAS identification, based on proven technologies for RPAS traffic management Having a single system for both RPAS Id and RPAS traffic management functions: Makes costs lower Reduce the mass of the systems to be carried aboard the RPA Thank you for your attention