UAS integration into the National Airpsace system continues to be a long and daunting road with plenty of twists and turns. A variety of technologies continue to be researched
and developed but with no overall standard due to a multitude of technological alternatives
as well as barriers. The changing
landscape saw some light at the end of the tunnel with the recent release of
Part 107, which applies to small unmanned aircraft for commercial operation. The sUAS market has begun to grow and is
predicted to generate more than $82 billion for the US economy and create more
than 100,000 jobs over the next 10 years. Due to the lower cost of such platforms, ease
of access, vast number of applications, and the new FAA regulations, the commercial
sUAS industry could potentially grow
more rapidly than any other area. However
the integration of such platforms in the NAS still leaves a few gaps to be
filled such as the challenges of autonomy.
Levels of Autonomy and factors affecting it can vary based
on the UAS platform and environment.
Even most UAS used in the military aren’t fully autonomous. Defining the threshold at which operator
intervention and system automation takes hold is still a challenge. An effective human-automation interaction
level must be defined along with trust and mode awareness. UAS automation roles and responsibilities are
still being defined. An example of the
differences in definitions can be shown below in figure 1. Three different sources and their associated definitions
for levels of autonomy shown below gives some insight into the issue.
NextGen is a big proponent for utilizing autonomous methods
for safely controlling UAS in the NAS.
However, at what level will automation help with self separation, sense
and avoid, lost link, and other pilot/aircraft interaction automated
assistance. Research continues to be
ongoing for testing automated systems such as NASA’s Ikhana Predator B to
determine the level of autonomy that can help in avoiding other air traffic in
the NAS.
Ironically, per Part 107 and the use of small UAS which is
considered less than 55 lbs. autonomy isn’t part of the picture. Flying must be conducted within line of
sight, during daylight hours, at a maximum altitude of 400 feet, operations in
B, C, D and E airspace is allowed with ATC permission, but under normal
circumstances must be 5 miles from the nearest airport. In addition, FAA airworthiness certification is
not required. Even though autonomy does
not play a direct role in this type of commercial integration, the types of UAS
platforms under 55 lbs offer some of the latest technology including high
levels of automation based on flight controller types. Many current off the shelf UAS can take-off, land,
and fly pre-programmed flights similar to how the military would carry out a
UAS type mission, just at a higher altitude and longer range. Some UAS even offer autonomy options with the
ability to follow an object or person, as well as avoid obstacles based on
size, distance, and lighting.
As the commercial sUAS industry begins to grow more rapidly
types of automation used on such platforms will increase as they already have
to help the pilot in command. Automation
technologies used on sUAS have the ability to grow more rapidly due to the vast
number of applications they can be used on and consumer level pricing.
Along with R&D from NASA and the DOD, actual sUAS platforms being
used per part 107 will also help shape and define the future levels of autonomy
integrated within the NAS. However, regulations governing such automation to insure safe flight may have a hard time keeping up with the fast paced technologies.
References
Anderson, J.
(2010). Challenges in
Autonomy. Retrieved from https://www.k-state.edu/ckus/conference/abstract_titles/AndersonChallenges.pdf
FAA. (2016). FAA
News. Retrieved from https://www.faa.gov/UAS/media/Part_107_Summary.pdf
NASA. (2013). NASA – UAS Integration in the NAS. Retrieved from file:///C:/Users/Jason_000/Downloads/NASA_SBIR_amp_STTR_Program_Homepage_-_UAS_Integration_in_the_NAS_-_2013-10-31.pdf
