impact assessment of uas operations on airport capacity applying contingency operations

16/11/2017 Congress Name - City Name/Country

Universidade de São Paulo

XVI SITRAER – Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF UAS

OPERATIONS ON AIRPORT

CAPACITY APPLYING

CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS

D. Baum, E. Neto, P. Cugnasca, J. Rady, J. CamargoI. Oliveira, M. Mello; J. Fregnani

Oct/2017

16/11/2017 Congress Name - City Name/Country 2

Agenda

Introduction

Literature Review

UAS Operation and Contingency Procedures

Airport Capacity Models

Non-Segregated Airport and UAS C2 Link Failure

Impact Assessment of UAS C2 Link Failure on Airport Capacity

Final Considerations

XVI SITRAER – Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Oct/2017


Introduction

About UAS and How the UAS should be operated;

Taxiing is carried out normally, but with lower speed for UAS, the use time ofthe runway is also generally higher;

Loss of C2 link;

Impacts on airspace capacity;

Reduction of Airport Capacity may occur;

Aim: runway capacity evaluation, considering the analytical model used by the Brazilian Department of Airspace Control (DECEA).



Literature Review

Integration of their operation with manned aircraft;

ICAO verify if UAS operations at airports will generate newhazards;

UAS operations in airports need technical developments and safetyanalyses more populated areas and to larger airports

Airport UAS vision:

• types and number of operations

• it is essential that the needs and operationalcharacteristics of the UAS are thoroughly understood



Literature Review

FAA model:

• configuration of runway system operation

• flight rule used

• MIX of aircraft

• landing and take-off proportion

• location and number of runway exits

DECEA model:

• MIX of aircraft

• approach speed

• length of the various approach segments

• minimum regulatory separation of aircraft

• average time of runway occupation



Literature Review

DECEA the average time of runway occupation is an important variableto define the runway system;

Loss of C2 link: activities to be performed by the ATCo, one of them is theinterruption of the airport operations:

• impacts the capacity of the airport runway system,during the period in which the event occurs.




UAS must be able to follow its flight plan and or any clearance given byATC;

Current controller will continue to use voice radio for emergencycommands to the aircraft;

Departures from controlled airports will use standard published departureand arrival procedures;

Certainty that other aircraft on procedures close to the UAS are nothazarded by the UAS

If there is a risk of collision, the UAS will need to be able to takeemergency collision avoidance actions: ACAS




ATC may provide traffic advisories to the UAS and other aircraft;

Communications link control data link

• Voice communications may be used as standby

Normal ATC operations, whether by voice or data link, rely on pilotin command responses;

UAS will need to interpret an emergency voice instruction from acontroller, respond to Controller Pilot Data Link Communication(CPDLC) free text messages, or negotiate trajectories;




Considering operation of UAS in an airport, must be considered:

• UAV’s ability to follow ATC instructions;

• applicability of instrument approach minima to UAVoperations

• infrastructure, such as approach aids, ground handlingvehicles, landing aids, launch/recovery aids;

• integration of UAV with manned aircraft in the vicinity of,and on the movement area of, an airport and others

Considering an airport provided with TWR, the UAV should be ableto perform the maneuvers defined by ATCo, as well as mannedaircraft, without reduction of safety levels.




C2 link failure:

A. continue original flight plan.

B. land at nearest appropriate designated landing.

C. direct return to departure aerodrome or departure site.

D. flight termination: should be avoided as it presents a riskto people and property on the ground.

E. climb to altitude to attempt to regain the C2 link




Factors That Affect Airfield Capacity:

• configuration, number, spacing, and orientation of therunway systemland at nearest appropriate designatedlanding;

• configuration, number, and location of taxiways andrunway exits;

• size and mix of aircraft using the facilities;

• weather, particularly visibility and ceiling

• wind conditions

• number of arrivals relative to the number of departures




FAA model for Runway Capacity:




Brazilian Model :




UAS operation in normal operational conditions :




C2 Link failure and the contingency operation

1. Continue Original Flight Plan

2. Land at nearest appropriate designated landing site

3. Direct return to departure aerodrome or departure site



Impact Assessment of UAS C2 link Failure on Airport Capacity Airport is impracticable ATCo of Destination Airport and depends on:

1. ATCo knowing what the procedure will be used incase of C2 link failure;

2. UAV to have surveillance emitting equipment

3. Both the TWR and the APP shall be provided with theprocedures to be followed in case of C2 link failure,

4. Preparation of a document of Operational Agreementbetween the APP and the TWR



Final Consideration Fundamental to analyze the airport capacity impacts Know the

operation of the UAV as a whole, considering normal operation UAS andin case of C2 link failure :

• runway occupation time and

• taxiing time

This analysis will entail the inclusion of another category of aircraftin the equation that defines the runway occupation time: UAS

Future trends in UAS avionics specifications: funcionality,architeture, safety, availability, eficiency, and certification.

Next steps: complexity model considering UAS in non-segregated


16/11/2017 Congress Name - City Name/Country

Universidade de São Paulo

Impact assessment of UAS operations on airport capacity applying contingency operations


Special thanks to Boeing Research & Technology Brazil (BR&T-Brazil) for sponsoring this research and for its institutional support to the Safety

Analysis Group (GAS) of the Engineering School of the University of São Paulo (Poli-USP).

Thank you!

D. Baum, E. Neto, P. Cugnasca, J. Rady, J. CamargoI. Oliveira, M. Mello; J. Fregnani