UAS ARC Recommended Changes – 8/7/12

Integration of Civil Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)

into the National Airspace System (NAS)

Roadmap Basis
Working DRAFT– v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

ii

Contents 

Executive Summary

1 Purpose and Background of Civil UAS Roadmap

1.1 History of UAS

1.2 Future Civil Uses 

1.3 Definitions

1.4 Policy

1.4.1 FAA UAS Policy Basis

1.4.2 International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)Policy

1.4.3 Future Considerations

2 UAS Operations in NAS

2.1 FAA’s Dual Role for UAS Integration

2.2 UAS Challenges

2.2.1 Policy, Guidance, and Regulatory Challenges

2.2.2 Air Traffic Operational Challenges

2.2.3 Technological Challenges

2.2.4 Managing the Challenges

3 Perspective 1: Accommodation

3.1 Overview

3.2 Standards

3.3 Rules and Regulations

3.4 Certification of the UAS

3.5 Procedures and Airspace

3.6 Training (Pilot, Flightcrew Member, and Air Traffic Controller)

3.7 R&D / Technology

3.8 Test Ranges

4 Perspective 2: Integration

4.1 Overview

4.2 Standards

4.3 Rules and Regulations

4.4 Certification of the UAS

4.5 Procedures and Airspace

4.6 Training (Pilot, Flightcrew Member, and Air Traffic Controller)

4.7 R&D / Technology

5 Perspective 3: Evolution

5.1 Overview

5.2 Standards

5.3 Rules and Regulations

5.4 Certification of the UAS

5.5 Procedures and Airspace
Working DRAFT– v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

iii

5.6 Training (Pilot, Flightcrew Member, and Air Traffic Controller)

5.7 R&D / Technology

6 Key Messages

6.1 Summary

6.2 List of Key Messages

7 Goals and Metrics

7.1 Certification Requirements (Airworthiness, Production, Operator)

7.2 Certification Requirements (Pilot/Crew)

7.3 Ground-Based Sense and Avoid (GBSAA)

7.4 Airborne-Based Sense and Avoid (ABSAA)

7.5 Command and Control (C2)

7.6 Small UAS (sUAS) Rules

7.7 Test Ranges

7.8 Miscellaneous

A Acronyms

B Glossary

C Goals and Metrics Summary
Working DRAFT– v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

iv

Executive Summary

Expanding Operations of Unmanned Aircraft Systems in the NAS

Since the early 1990s, Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) have operated on a limited basis in the 

National Airspace System (NAS). Until recently, unmanned aircraft mainly supported public 

operations, such as military and border security operations, with the list of potential uses rapidly 

expanding to include a broad range of other activities including: aerial photography, surveying 

land and crops, communications and broadcast, monitoring forest fires and environmental 

conditions, and protecting critical infrastructures. Unmanned aircraft promise new ways for 

commercial enterprises and public operators to increase operational efficiency, decrease costs, 

and enhance safety.

As stated in Destination2025 (2011),

“The Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) mission is to provide the safest, 

most efficient aviation system in the world. What sets the United States apart is 

the size and complexity of our infrastructure, the diversity of our user groups, our 

commitment to safety and excellence, and a history of innovation and leadership 

in the world’s aviation community. Now we are working to develop new systems 

and to enhance a culture that increases the safety, reliability, efficiency, capacity, 

and environmental performance of our aviation system.”

The FAA created the Unmanned Aircraft Program Office (UAPO) to facilitate integration of

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) safely and efficiently into the NAS. Toward that goal, the 

FAA is collaborating with a broad spectrum of stakeholders, which includes manufacturers, 

commercial vendors, industry trade associations, technical standards organizations, academic 

institutions, research and development centers, governmental agencies and other regulators. 

Ultimately, UAS need to be integrated into the NAS without reducing existing capacity,

decreasing safety or placing other airspace users or persons and property on the ground at 

increased risk. Great progress has been made, but significant barriers remain.

A main objective of the FAA is to develop a sound technical, regulatory and policy basis for 

UAS to operate safely and efficiently in the NAS. Today, unmanned aircraft are typically given 

access to airspace through the issuance of Certificates of Waiver or Authorization (COAs) to 

public operators and Special Airworthiness Certificates – Experimental Category (SAC-ECs) to 

civil applicants. While, the FAA has a proven certification process in place for aircraft, a key 

challenge will be establishing airworthiness requirements and methods of compliance unique to 

UAS, including control stations that are not co-located with the aircraft and datalink 

communications used for command and control of the aircraft.

The process of developing regulations and standards is challenging and resource-intensive. It is 

a significant undertaking to build the basis for the National Airspace System to first 

accommodate, then integrate, and finally enable unfettered access of UAS in the NAS as it 

evolves over time. Government and industry stakeholders must work together and apply the 

necessary resources to bring this task to fruition.
Working DRAFT– v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

v

The FAA is committed to the safe and efficient integration of UAS into the NAS, thus enabling

this emerging technology to achieve its full potential safely.
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

1

1 Purpose and Background of Civil UAS Roadmap

Unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) and operations have significantly increased in number, 

technical complexity and sophistication during recent years without having the same history of 

compliance and oversight as manned aviation. In some cases, interpretation of regulations 

and/or standards may be needed to address characteristics unique to UAS. The UAS community 

is finding it difficult to apply existing rules. Ultimately, the pace of integration will be 

determined by the ability of industry, the user community, and FAA to overcome technical, 

regulatory, and operational challenges. The purpose of this roadmap is to outline, within a broad 

timeline, the tasks and considerations needed to enable UAS integration into the NAS for the 

planning purposes of the broader UAS community. 

The roadmap is intended to guide aviation stakeholders in understanding operational goals and 

challenges when considering future investments. It is organized into three perspectives that

highlight the multiple paths used to achieve the milestones outlined, while focusing on 

progressive accomplishments. The three perspectives described in this roadmap transcend 

specific timelines, and serve as an added way of examining the complex relationship of activities 

necessary to integrate UAS into the NAS. In effect, the perspective approach adds a third 

dimension to the traditional two-dimensional approach that frames and considers time periods. 

Roadmap timeframes are defined in the President’s National Aeronautics Research and 

Development Plan, which specifies less than 5 years as the near-term, 5-10 years as the midterm, and greater than 10 years as the long-term. For this roadmap, the long-term is defined as 

2022-2026, which is consistent with Joint Planning and Development Office (JPDO) National 

Airspace System Concept of Operations and Vision for the Future of Aviation and NextGen Air 

Transportation System (NGATS) Integrated Plan.

Integration of UAS into the NAS will require: review of current policies, regulations, standards, 

and procedures; identification of gaps in current UAS technologies; development of new 

technologies; and eventual certification of aircraft systems, propulsion systems, and airmen.

1.1 History of UAS

Historically, unmanned aircraft have been known by many names including; “drones”, “remotely 

piloted vehicles (RPVs)”, “unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs)”, “models” and “radio control 

(R/C) aircraft”. Today, the term UAS is used to emphasize the fact that there are separate system 

components required to support airborne operations without a pilot onboard the aircraft. Early

UAS operations received little attention from the FAA and its predecessor agencies due to the 

infrequency of operations, which were mostly conducted in remote locations or in special use 

airspace and were not deemed to impact the safety of the NAS. In the past two decades, the 

number of unmanned aircraft operations has been increasing dramatically, highlighting the need 

for a structured approach for safe and efficient integration. 

1.2 Future Civil Uses

The use of UAS in commercial applications is expected to expand in a number of areas 

(“Operational Services and Environment Definition (OSED) for Unmanned Aircraft Systems 

(UAS), RTCA DO-320, 2010). Some of the currently proposed civil and commercial applications 

of UAS include:
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

2

• Security awareness

• Disaster response, including search and rescue

• Communications and broadcast, including news/sporting event coverage

• Cargo transport

• Spectral and thermal analysis

• Critical infrastructure monitoring, including power facilities, ports, and pipelines

• Commercial photography, aerial mapping and charting, and advertising

1.3 Definitions

There are several terms used in this document that are defined below as a common point of 

reference:

Unmanned Aircraft (UA) A device used or intended to be used for flight in the air that has no 

onboard pilot.

UAS Flightcrew member A person responsible for duties on unmanned aircraft that affect safe 

flight. This includes the pilot in command (PIC) and may include others required to ensure safe 

operations of the aircraft.

Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) An unmanned aircraft and its associated elements related to

safe operations, which may include control stations, control links, support equipment, payloads, 

flight termination systems, and launch/recovery equipment. As shown in Figure 1, it consists of 

three elements:

1. Unmanned Aircraft

2. Control Station

3. Data Link 

Figure 1: The UAS and Flightcrew Members

The National Airspace System (NAS) The common network of United States airspace – air 

navigation facilities, equipment and services, airports or landing areas; aeronautical charts, 

information and services; rules, regulations and procedures, technical information; and 

manpower and material. (see Figure 2)
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

3

Figure 2: The NAS

NextGen An initiative focused on optimizing the operating model to best position the FAA for 

future success. According to the FAA Destination 2025, 2011:

NextGen is a series of inter-linked programs, systems, and policies that implement 

advanced technologies and capabilities to dramatically change the way the 

current aviation system is operated. NextGen is satellite-based and relies on a 

network to share information and digital communications so all users of the 

system are aware of other users’ precise locations.

1.4 Policy 

The FAA is responsible for developing plans and policy for the safe and efficient use of the 

United States navigable airspace. This responsibility includes harmonizing, to the extent 

possible, with the international community for the mutual development of civil aviation in a safe 

and orderly manner. Components of existing FAA and ICAO policy are outlined below.

1.4.1 FAA UAS Policy Basis

Established FAA aviation policies support a minimum level of safety for the National Airspace 

System (NAS). At the core of these policies is the concept that each aircraft is flown by a pilot 

in accordance with required procedures and practices. This same policy applies to UAS.

Aviation policies focus on overall safety being addressed through three primary areas: 

equipment, personnel, and operations & procedures. Each of these areas has standards and 

minimum levels of safety that must be met independent of each other. As a matter of policy, for 

example, a new aircraft must be able to independently obtain an airworthiness certificate 

regardless of the airspace class where it might be flown. However, as a result or part of this 

certification, new procedures may be required for flightcrew members and ATC in order to 

maintain the minimum level of safety of the NAS while accommodating the new technology. 

Under special certifications and authorizations, limited operations may be authorized for 

equipment unable to meet current standards.
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

4

The application of these established aviation policies to UAS is summarized in this excerpt from 

the FAA Notice of Policy: Unmanned Aircraft Operations in the National Airspace System 

(Federal Register Docket No. FAA-2006-25714, issued February 13, 2007).

Regulatory standards need to be developed to enable current technology for 

unmanned aircraft to comply with Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations 

(CFR)...The operator is required to establish the UAS airworthiness and 

demonstrate that a collision with another aircraft or other airspace user is 

extremely improbable...The FAA’s UAS guidance applies the pilot-in-command 

concept to unmanned aircraft and includes minimum qualification and currency 

requirements.

These policies have enabled the accommodation of UAS into the NAS on the foundation that 

operations are conducted safely, present no threat to the general public, and do no harm or 

adversely impact other users. Until UAS possess the ability to fully integrate into the NAS, e.g. 

are able to obtain a standard airworthiness certificate and be flown by a certified pilot in 

accordance with required procedures, their access to the NAS will be limited.

1.4.2 International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Policy

ICAO is responsible for facilitating the agreement among Contracting States of certain principles 

and arrangements in order that international civil aviation may be developed in a safe and orderly 

manner.

The goal of ICAO in addressing unmanned aviation is to provide the fundamental international 

regulatory framework to underpin routine operation of UAS throughout the world in a safe, 

harmonized, and seamless manner comparable to that of manned operations. 

Current ICAO guidance material for UAS is published in Circular 328, which provides basic 

guidelines for member States to introduce and integrate UAS into airspace in a consistent manner 

globally. The document’s guiding policy towards UAS is:

A number of Civil Aviation Authorities (CAA) have adopted the policy that UAS 

must meet the equivalent levels of safety as manned aircraft...In general, UAS 

should be operated in accordance with the rule governing the flight of manned 

aircraft and meet equipment requirements applicable to the class of airspace 

within which they intend to operate...To safely integrate UAS in non-segregated 

airspace, the UAS must act and respond as manned aircraft do. Air Traffic, 

Airspace and Airport standards should not be significantly changed. The UAS 

must be able to comply with existing provisions to the greatest extent possible.

(ICAO Circular 328, AN/190 unmanned aircraft systems, 2011)

ICAO develops standards and recommended practices (SARPs), which are generally followed by 

national civil aviation authorities of the member States. Although the FAA is not governed by 

ICAO, it plans to harmonize with international efforts and adhere to ICAO SARPs when 

possible.
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

5

1.4.3 Future Policy Considerations

RTCA, Inc. is a private, not-for-profit corporation that develops consensus-based 

recommendations regarding communications, navigation, surveillance, and air traffic 

management system issues. The FAA considers RTCA recommendations when making policy, 

program, and regulatory decisions. The RTCA Special Committee 203 (SC-203) was established 

in 2004, to help assure the safe, efficient and compatible operation of UAS with other aircraft

operating within the NAS. This Special Committee has developed and documented guiding 

principles for UAS integration, which are summarized below:

• UAS must operate safely, efficiently, and compatibly with service providers and other 

users of the NAS, so that overall safety is not degraded

• UAS will have access to the NAS, provided they have appropriate equipage and the 

ability to meet the requirements for flying in various classes of airspace.

• Routine UAS operations will not require the creation of new special use airspace, or 

modification of existing special use airspace

• Except for some special cases, such as small UAS with very limited operational range, all 

UAS will require design and airworthiness certification to fly civil operations in the NAS

• UAS pilots will require certification, though some of the requirements may differ from 

manned aviation

• UAS will comply with ATC instructions, clearances, and procedures when receiving air 

traffic services

• UAS pilot (the pilot-in-command) will always have responsibility for the unmanned 

aircraft while it is operating

Through an FAA established UAS Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC), the FAA continues

to collaborate with government and industry stakeholders for recommendations regarding the 

path toward integration of UAS into the NAS. This effort will harmonize with the work being 

done by international organizations working toward a universal goal of safe and efficient UAS 

airspace operations.
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

6

2 UAS Operations in NAS

This roadmap focuses on civil UAS access to the NAS. To this end, the FAA and UAS 

community are working to address the myriad challenges associated with this effort.

2.1 FAA’s Dual Role for UAS Integration 

For UAS, as with all aircraft, the FAA acts in a dual role. As the regulator, the FAA ensures 

aviation safety of persons and property in the air and on the ground. As the service provider, the 

FAA is responsible for the providing safe and efficient air traffic control services in the NAS and 

the other portions of global airspace delegated to the US by ICAO.

As part of its regulator role, the Office of Aviation Safety (AVS) efforts are led by the UAPO, 

AFS-407. The main focus of the UAPO is to provide within the existing AVS structure, subject 

matter expertise, research, and recommendations to develop UAS policy, regulations, guidance, 

and procedures for UAS airworthiness and operations. UAPO responsibilities span the entire 

scope of the UAS “system”, focusing on safe integration of UAS into the NAS.

As service provider, the Air Traffic Organization (ATO) efforts are led by the UAS Group, AJV13, which considers operational authorizations for UAS flight that are unable to meet current 

regulations and procedures. A Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) is issued with 

limitations and provisions that mitigate the increased risks resulting from the use of uncertified 

technology. ATO is responsible for the safe and efficient handling of aircraft and the 

development of the airspace rules and procedures to support routine operations in the NAS.

2.2 UAS Challenges

A number of issues that impact the integration of UAS into the NAS are being considered across 

the regulatory and service provider roles of the FAA. To ensure the FAA meets the goals set 

forth in this roadmap, these offices will be addressing the challenges of regulations, operations, 

and technology, as outlined in the following sub-sections.

2.2.1 Policy, Guidance, and Regulatory Challenges

To ensure the FAA has the appropriate consideration of UAS, many products will need to be 

reviewed and may need updated to specifically address UAS integration into the NAS. In some 

cases, new products will need to be created. In other cases, UAS technology and operations will 

need to be matured so that they can meet applicable regulations and standards. Figure 3 depicts

product areas, based on the RTCA notional architecture, and primarily relates to certification of 

airmen and the unmanned aircraft system that will require research.
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

7

Figure 3: AVS Products Needed to Regulate

The challenge is to identify and develop the regulatory structure for UAS that encompasses areas 

listed in Figure 3. For the entire system there is also a requirement to:

• Develop minimum standards for Sense and Avoid (SAA), Control and Communication 

(C2), and Separation Assurance to meet operational requirements for specified airspace

• Understand the security and environmental implications of UAS operations

2.2.2 Air Traffic Operational Challenges

There are also numerous products that need to be reviewed and refined or developed through

supporting research to permit UAS operations in the NAS. The ATO UAS Group coordinates

the efforts to complete these tasks.
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

8

Figure 4: ATO Context to Manage the NAS

The goal of safely integrating UAS without segregating, delaying, or diverting other aircraft and 

other users of the system requires significant challenges in the areas outlined in Figure 4 above. 

For NAS integration, this also includes:

• Identifying policies and requirements for UAS to comply with ATC clearances and 

instructions commensurate with manned aircraft (specifically addressing the inability of 

UAS to comply directly with ATC visual clearances)

• Establishing procedures and techniques for safe and secure exchange of voice and data 

communication between UAS pilots, air traffic controllers, and other NAS users

• Establishing wake vortex and turbulence avoidance criteria needed for UAS

2.2.3 Technological Challenges

The FAA recognizes that current UAS technologies were not developed to an acceptable set of 

airworthiness standards. Current civil airworthiness regulations may not consider many of the 

unique aspects of UAS operations. Although significant technological advances have been made 

by the UAS community, critical research is needed to fully understand the impact of UAS 

operations in the NAS. There has also been little research to support the equipment design

necessary for UAS airworthiness certification. In the near-to-mid-term, UAS research will need 

to focus on technology deemed necessary for UAS access to the NAS.

As UAS are introduced, their expected range of performance will need to be evaluated for impact 

on the NAS. UAS operate with widely varying performance characteristics that do not 

necessarily align with manned aircraft performance – some smaller, some slower, some flying 

much lower and higher in altitude, and for much longer durations. Similarly, the issue of 
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

9

performance gap between the pilot and the avionics will impact NAS operations. One example 

might be the lack of a quantitative time standard for a pilot response to ATC directions (such as 

“turn left heading 270, maintain FL250”) does not exist – there is an acceptable delay for the 

pilot’s verbal response and physical action, but there is no documented required range of 

acceptable values. Avionics that perform the corresponding function cannot be designed and 

built without these performance requirements being established.

Existing standards ensure safe operation by pilots resident on the aircraft. These standards may 

not translate well to UAS designs where pilots are remotely located off the aircraft. Removing 

the pilot from the aircraft creates a series of performance considerations between manned and 

unmanned aircraft that need to be fully researched and understood to determine acceptability and 

potential impact on safe operations in the NAS. These include the following considerations:

• The UAS pilot is not on-board the aircraft and does not have the same sensory and 

environmental cues as a manned aircraft pilot

• The UAS pilot does not have the ability to directly comply with see-and-avoid 

responsibilities

• The UAS pilot must depend on a data link for control of the aircraft (Affect of response 

to revised ATC clearances, other ATC instructions, or unplanned contingencies: e.g.,

maneuver aircraft )

• UAS cannot comply with certain air traffic control clearances and alternate means may 

need to be considered (e.g. use of visual clearances) 

• UAS present air traffic controllers with a different range of platform sizes and operational 

capabilities (such as size, speed, altitude, and wake turbulence criteria, and combinations 

thereof)

• Some UAS launch and recovery methods differ from manned aircraft and require manual 

placement and removal from runway, lead vehicle for taxi operations or dedicated launch 

and recovery systems

Therefore, it is necessary to develop operational concepts, formulate standards, and promote

technological development that will enable manned and unmanned aircraft to operate cohesively 

in the same airspace. Specific technology challenges include two critical functional areas:

• “Sense and Avoid” (SAA) capability must provide for self-separation and ultimately for 

collision avoidance protection between UAS and other aircraft analogous to the “see and 

avoid” operation of manned aircraft and that meets an acceptable level of safety. SAA 

technology development is immature. In manned flight, see and avoid, radar, visual 

sighting, separation standards, proven technologies and procedures, and well-defined 

pilot behaviors combine to ensure safe operation. On the other hand, unmanned flight 

requires an alternate method to comply with “see and avoid” operational rules to detect 

traffic and to determine/execute avoidance maneuvers. SAA system standards must be 

developed to assure both self-separation and collision avoidance capability for UAS. 

Interoperability constraints must also be defined for safe and secure interactions between 

SAA-enabled UAS and other airborne and ground-based collision avoidance systems. 

While SAA may be an independent system, it must be designed to be compatible with 
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

10

other modes of separation provision (e.g. Air Traffic Control separation services). See 

Sections 7.3 and 7.4 for specific goals and metrics.

• Control and Communication system performance requirements are being developed by 

SC-203, Working Group-2 and will specify the necessary minimum performance to 

achieve the necessary higher-level (UAS level) performance and safety requirements. 

Third party communication service providers are common today (ARINC, Harris, etc.) 

and the FAA has experience with setting and monitoring performance of third parties. 

The use of third parties is dependent on the UAS architecture chosen, but these are still 

being evaluated in terms of feasibility from a performance, cost, and safety perspective. 

See Section 7.5 for specific goals and metrics.

2.2.4 Managing the Challenges

To provide the UAS community insight into the FAA process for fostering UAS flight in the 

NAS, Figure 5 highlights the intended shift in focus over time. This method is consistent with 

the approach used for new technologies on manned aircraft.

0

100

NearTermMidTermFarTerm

Percent of Operations

COA/Experimentals

Standard Airworthiness

Figure 5: Transition from COA/Experimental to Standard Airworthiness

Recognizing the challenges and the complex coordination required for integration, the UAS 

roadmap addresses the efforts needed to move forward incrementally toward the goal of full 

NAS integration. 

Based on this goal, the FAA identifies three key perspectives as a means for examining the way 

ahead. These perspectives transcend the timelines of near, mid and far term and provide 

additional insight into the task of integrating UAS into the NAS:
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

11

Perspective 1: Accommodation. Ability to take current UA and apply special 

mitigations and procedures to safely facilitate limited access to the NAS. UAS 

operations in the NAS are considered on a case-by-case basis. Accommodation 

will predominate in the near term, and while it will decline significantly as 

integration begins and expands in the mid term, it will continue to be a viable 

means for NAS access. During the near term, R&D will continue to identify 

challenges, validate advanced mitigation strategies, and explore opportunities to 

progress UAS integration into the NAS.

Perspective 2: Integration. Establishing threshold performance requirements for 

UAS that would increase access to the NAS, is a primary objective of integration. 

During the mid - far time periods, the agency will establish policy, regulations, 

procedures, and understanding of systems and operations to support routine NAS 

operations. Integration will begin in the near-to-mid-term with the implementation 

of the small UAS rule and will expand further over time (mid and far term) to 

consider wider integration of a broader field of UAS.

Perspective 3 – Evolution – All required policy, regulations, procedures, 

technologies, and training are in place and routinely updated to support UAS 

operations in the NAS operational environment as it evolves over time. It is 

important that the UAS community maintains the understanding that the NAS 

environment is not static, and that there are many improvements planned to the 

NAS over the next 13-15 years. To avoid the obsolescence, UAS will need to 

maintain a dual-focus: integration into today’s NAS while maintaining 

cognizance of how the NAS is evolving. 

Timely progress on products, decisions, research, development, test, and evaluation will be 

needed to successfully move from accommodation to integration and through to the evolving 

NAS.

The approach to addressing the challenges focuses on the following topics. They are not 

mutually exclusive, but instead, are highly inter-dependent. 

1. Standards

2. Rules and Regulations

3. Certification of the UAS

4. Procedures and Airspace

5. Training (Pilot, Flightcrew Member, and Controller)

6. R&D and Technology

The roadmap discusses the activities and transitions for these topic areas from the vantage of the 

three perspectives.
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

12

3 Perspective 1: Accommodation

The FAA’s focus in the near-term will be on safely allowing for the expanded operation of UAS

through accommodation. Over time, increased access to the NAS through accommodation will 

be possible through improvements to current mitigations and introduction of advanced 

mitigations made possible by enhanced procedures and technology. Research and development

on current and advanced mitigations is necessary as it is accepted that, while the volume of 

unmanned aircraft operations needing accommodation will diminish over time, the need to 

maintain this avenue for access will continue. The consideration and planning for integration of 

UAS into the NAS will continue simultaneously. 

3.1 Overview

There has been a growing interest in a wide variety of civil uses for unmanned aircraft. There 

are a number of airworthiness paths that can be applied for airworthiness certification of UAS. 

Of the various methods, one method that the UAS civil community is currently using to access 

the NAS is the Special Airworthiness Certificate - Experimental Category (SAC-EC) process, 

which requires specific, proven capabilities to enable operations at a constrained level. Each 

application is reviewed for approval on a case-by-case basis that allows a carefully-defined level 

of access that is limited and dependent on risk mitigations that ensure safety and efficiency of the 

NAS is not diminished. The use of the experimental airworthiness certificate for UAS is similar 

to the use for manned aircraft.

To date, the FAA has issued over 90 experimental certificates to 13 civil operators utilizing 20 

unique UAS designs, including 6 certificates for Optionally Piloted Aircraft (OPA). These 

experimental certificates have been useful for UAS research and development (R&D), and as

R&D efforts subside, the use of SAC-EC may decrease. While the FAA continues to 

accommodate special access to the NAS, existing airworthiness standards are also an avenue for 

full type certification. The FAA is working with the ARC to gain feedback to potential changes

to airworthiness standards for UAS if necessary. In the long-term, UAS that are designed to a 

standard and built to conform to the design can be integrated into the NAS as fully certificated 

aircraft.

3.2 Standards

If UAS are to operate routinely in the NAS, they must conform to an agreed upon set of 

standards. Requirements will vary depending on the nature and complexity of the operation, 

aircraft or component system limitations, pilot and other crewmember qualifications, and the 

operating environment

A technical (or operational) standard is an established norm or requirement about a technical (or 

operational) system which documents uniform engineering or technical criteria, methods, 

processes and practices. A standard may be developed privately or unilaterally, by a corporation, 

regulatory body, or the military. Standards can also be developed by organizations such as trade 

unions and associations. These organizations often have more diverse input and usually develop 

voluntary standards which may be adopted by the FAA as a means of compliance.
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

13

To operate an aircraft safely and efficiently in today’s NAS, a means of complying with Title 14 

of the Code of Federal Regulation (14 CFR) must be developed. Aircraft certification standards 

govern the design, construction, manufacturing, and continued airworthiness of aircraft used in 

private and commercial operations. These standards were developed with an underlying

assumption that a person would be onboard the aircraft and manipulating the controls. This has 

led to numerous requirements that make aircraft highly reliable and safe for their intended

operations. 

While UAS share many of the same design considerations as manned aircraft, such as structural 

integrity and performance, most existing unmanned aircraft and control stations have not been 

designed to comply with civil airworthiness standards. Beyond the problem of meeting existing 

aircraft certification standards, other components of the UAS, such as the equipment and 

software associated with the data link (control and communication) and the launch and recovery 

mechanisms, are not currently addressed in 14 CFR. 

Since 2004, the FAA has developed close working relationships with several standards 

development organizations. Most of these organizations plan to complete their UAS standards 

development efforts in the near-to-mid-term timeframe. When accepted, these standards

development products will provide a means of compliance for rules established in the mid-term. 

The FAA has also been either the lead (or an important participant) in cross-agency efforts that 

influence standards development and has coordinated and harmonized these activities with 

international efforts.

Standardization efforts have already produced a number of useful definitions, guidance

documents, and considerations that provide common understanding and add insight and data to 

UAS integration efforts.

• SC-203’s Guidance Material (DO-304) and numerous position papers 

• SC-203’s Operational Services and Environment Definition For Unmanned Aircraft 

Systems (OSED, DO-320) which documented definitions and operating scenarios for 

different UAS operations in the NAS

• RTCA Air Traffic Management Advisory Committee, Requirements and Planning Work 

Group Report “Airspace Considerations for UAS Integration in the National Airspace 

System,” March 26, 2008

• SAA Workshop Reports which have documented SAA timelines and definitions

Standards development will continue with the goal of producing Minimum Performance 

Standards (MPS) by the end of the near-term. RTCA/SC-203 products will be taken under 

consideration by the FAA in the development of policy and guidance products such as Advisory 

Circulars. The MPS may be used to define Technical Standard Orders (TSOs) in the mid-tolong-term.

Additional coordination and input from the stakeholder community (industry and trade 

associations, manufacturers, academia and research organizations, and public agencies) is being 

provided with the recent establishment of the FAA-UAS ARC.
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

14

Although the need to develop standards cannot be overstated, detailed policy, guidance, technical 

performance requirements, and operational procedures are also needed to enable manned and 

unmanned aircraft to fly safely and efficiently in the NAS. See Section 7 for specific goals and 

metrics.

3.3 Rules and Regulations

Unmanned aircraft operations have significantly increased in number, technical complexity and 

sophistication during recent years without specific regulations to address their unique 

characteristics. For a person wishing to design, manufacture, market or operate an unmanned 

aircraft system (UAS) for a commercial mission and is seeking FAA approval for that aircraft, its 

pilot and the operations, existing rules have not been fully-tailored to the unique features of

UAS.

The FAA is in the process of publishing a Notice that will replace the current Interim 

Operational Guidance Material 08-01 which is used to support UAS accommodation. Since 

accommodation is not envisioned to be eliminated entirely, this guidance material will need to be 

updated periodically even as progress continues simultaneously on development of UAS rules 

and regulations for integration.

The appropriate regulations are being reviewed for applicability to UAS operations by the FAA, 

industry groups, and an ARC. The results of this review will determine any regulatory gaps that 

need to be addressed in the development of specific UAS guidance. Based on the findings of this 

review, a determination will be made regarding the need to modify, supplement, or create new 

regulations to support UAS beyond the near term. UAS rulemaking will follow these steps.

3.4 Airworthiness Certification of the UAS

Airworthiness certification is a process that the FAA uses to ensure that an aircraft design 

complies with Airworthiness Regulations codified in 14 CFR and that an aircraft conforms with 

its approved design. 

Airworthiness standards for aircraft are codified in 14 CFR, with processes defined for FAA type 

certification in FAA Order 8110.4 and airworthiness certification in FAA Order 8130.2. Civil 

UAS are currently accommodated with SAC-EC under FAA Order 8130.34.

Consideration of UAS in the certification process will be limited in number until such time as a 

broad and significant consideration is given to existing standards, regulations, and policy. UAS

operators must employ certified systems that enable compliance with standardized air traffic 

operations and contingency/emergency procedures for UAS.

The FAA believes that the UAS community will be best served by their use of an incremental 

stepwise approach as opposed to a “jump” to a civil type certification. As additional UAS 

airworthiness options are considered and UAS airworthiness standards are developed, type 

certification may be more efficiently and effectively achieved, as shown in Figure 8. The UAS 

Industry will continue to build capabilities into the mid- and long-term time frames. See Section 

7.1 for specific goals and metrics.
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

15

Figure 8: Potential Airworthiness Path for UAS Industry

3.5 Procedures and Airspace

A procedure is a series of actions or operations which have to be executed in the same manner in 

order to always obtain the same result under the same circumstances (for example, emergency 

procedures). The NAS depends on the structure of its airspace and the use of standard 

procedures to enable safe and efficient operations. ATO Policy N JO 7210.766 (titled 

“Unmanned Aircraft Operations in the National Airspace System (NAS)”, March 28, 2011), 

defines how UAS are permitted to operate in the NAS today:

• COAs: for Public access to the NAS – interim regulatory guidance is being updated and 

will be released as a Notice

• SAC-EC: for civil access to the NAS

• AC 91-57: for Modelers (recreation) access to the NAS (June 1981)

SAC-EC and COAs will always be viable methods for accessing the NAS, but typically come 

with undesirable constraints and limitations. Expanded, easier access to the NAS will occur after 

the UAS certification criteria is defined and the FAA develops specific methods for 

appropriately integrating UAS into NAS operations.

Another requirement is the base-lining activity to assess UAS applicability to existing air traffic 

control regulations and orders. The resultant list of gaps will need to be analyzed, and decisions 

on accommodation or changes to UAS or regulations will be completed. Some sample 

differences that affect the air traffic system are:

• UAS Interoperability Issues:

o En route – current UAS are not RVSM capable; and they do not fly traditional 

trajectory-based flight paths and require non-traditional handling in emergency 

situations
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

16

o Terminal – UAS cannot comply with ATC visual separation clearances and 

cannot execute published instrument approach procedures

• Facilities – The introduction of UAS at existing airports represents a complex operational 

challenge. For the near term, it is expected that UAS will require deconfliction from 

mainstream air traffic, possibly accommodated with UAS launch windows, special 

airports, or off-airport locations where UAS can easily launch and recover. The sUAS 

Rule will not address the requirements for UAS at airport facilities, since these UAS will 

not use airports for take-off and landing. However, as civil UAS are developed that 

require airport access, airport integration requirements will need to be developed

ICAO has issued guidance requiring States to implement Safety Management Systems (SMS) 

programs. These programs are essential to manage risk in the aviation system, and the FAA 

fully supports this and is a leader in the design and implementation of SMS. Technical 

challenges abound, including the ability to analyze massive amounts of data to provide useful 

information for oversight and assessment of risk.

3.6 Training (Pilot, Flightcrew Member, and Air Traffic Controller)

UAS training standards will mirror manned aircraft training standards to the maximum extent 

possible and will account for all roles involved in UAS operation; specifically, the pilot, required 

crew members (such as a visual observer, or launch and recovery specialist), instructors, 

inspectors, maintainers, as well as the air traffic controllers. See Section 7.2 for specific goals 

and metrics.

Accident investigation policies, processes, procedures, and training will be developed near-term, 

and will be provided to Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) for implementation. Existing 

manned procedures will be leveraged as much as possible, though differences will need to be 

highlighted and resolved (e.g. when an unmanned aircraft accident occurs, there may be a need 

to impound the control station as well as the aircraft).

3.7 R&D / Technology 

Research in the areas of gaps in current technology and new UAS technologies and operations 

will support and enable the development of airworthiness and operational guidance required to 

address new and novel aspects of UAS and associated flight operations. The FAA will continue 

to articulate requirements for flight in the NAS so R&D efforts are not duplicative and make the 

best use of limited resources. Additionally, the FAA UAS R&D plan is considered within the 

JPDO RD&D roadmap to prevent overlap and provide opportunities for research collaboration.

R&D efforts with industry support the establishment of acceptable performance limits in the 

NAS and enable the development of performance parameters for today’s NAS, while evaluating 

future concepts, technologies, and procedures for NextGen. The Technical Community 

Representative Group (TCRG) is sponsoring broad-based UAS research (SAA, C2, and control 

station studies) aimed at integration with NextGen and validation of concepts. Near-term 

expected progress is described here:

Sense and Avoid:
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

17

Significant research into SAA methods is underway by both government and industry through a 

variety of approaches and sensor modes. Specifically the FAA is researching:

1. Establishment of Sense and Avoid system definitions and performance levels

2. Assessment of Sense and Avoid system multi-sensor use and other technologies

3. Minimum Sense and Avoid information set required for collision avoidance 

maneuvering.

Some public agencies and commercial companies are seeking to develop advanced mitigations,

such as Ground Based Sense and Avoid (GBSAA) systems, as a strategy for increased access. 

Concept-of-use demonstrations are under way at several locations to use GBSAA as a mitigation 

to see and avoid requirements for public UAS COA proponents in limited operational areas.

GBSAA research and the test evaluations will help develop the sensor, link, and algorithm 

requirements that could allow GBSAA to function as a partial solution set for meeting the SAA 

requirement and will help build the overall SAA requirements in the long-term. Additionally, as 

GBSAA technology matures, GBSAA could be utilized to provide “localized” UAS NAS 

integration in addition to being used as an advanced accommodation tool. See Section 7.3 for 

specific goals and metrics

Research is underway on Airborne SAA (ABSAA) concepts. Due to complexity, significant 

progress in ABSAA is not expected until the mid-term. Research goals for the near-term include 

a flight demonstration of various sensor modes (electro-optic/infrared, radar, TCAS and ADS-B).

Actual fielding of a standardized SAA system is a long-term objective. See Sections 7.4 for 

specific goals and metrics

Control and Communications:

A primary goal of C2 research is the development of an appropriate C2 link between the 

unmanned aircraft and the control station to support the required performance of the unmanned 

aircraft in the NAS and to ensure that the pilot always maintains a threshold level of control of 

the aircraft. Research will be conducted for UAS control data link communications to determine 

values for latency, availability, integrity, continuity and other performance measures.

UAS contingency and emergency scenarios also require research (e.g. how will a UAS in the 

NAS respond when the command link is lost either through equipment malfunction or malicious 

jamming, etc.). This research will drive standards that are being established:

• Development and validation of UAS control link prototype

• Vulnerability analysis of UAS safety critical communications

• Completion of large-scale simulations and flight testing of initial performance 

requirements

Spectrum and civil radio frequency (RF) allocation are issues that require global coordination. 

The World Radionavigation Conference (WRC) will allocate UAS civil spectrum for C2 in the 

near-term. Link security requirements, such as protection against intended and unintended 

jamming, RF interference, unauthorized link takeover, and spoofing, will also be investigated. 

See Section 7.5 for specific goals and metrics
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

18

Modeling and Simulation:

The FAA is working with other government agencies and industry to develop a collaborative 

UAS modeling and simulation environment to explore key challenges to UAS integration. The 

near-term modeling goals are to:

• Validate current mitigation proposals

• Establish a baseline of end-to-end UAS performance measures 

• Establish thresholds for safe and efficient introduction of UAS into the NAS

• Develop NextGen concepts, including 4-dimensional trajectory utilizing UAS technology

These modeling and simulation efforts will address NAS integration topics, such as ATC 

clearance, UAS inability to accept ATC visual clearances, lost link, and flyaway scenarios.

Human Factors:

With the pilot controlling the aircraft from beyond the aircraft, there emerges several human 

factors issues related to both the pilot and ATC, and how they will interact to safely operate

unmanned aircraft in the NAS. Human factors issues in manned aviation are well known, but

there needs to be further analyses, specifically regarding integration of UAS into the NAS. In 

the near-term, data will be collected to permit analysis of how pilots fly UAS, how controllers 

provide service involving a mix of manned aircraft and UAS, and how pilots and controllers 

interact with each other, with the goal of developing pilot, ATC, and automation roles and 

responsibilities concepts. A JPDO workshop, with collaboration of Government, Academia, and 

Industry researchers, identified several interrelated research challenges (Joint Planning and 

Development Office, 2011):

• Effective Human-Automation Interaction (level; trust; and mode awareness)

• Pilot-Centric GCS Design (displays; sensory deficit and remediation; and sterile cockpit)

• Display of Traffic / Airspace Information (separation assurance interface)

• Predictability and Contingency Management (lost link status; lost ATC communication; 

and ATC workload)

• Definition of Roles and Responsibilities (communication flow among crew, ATC, and 

flight dispatcher)

• System-Level Issues (NAS-wide human performance requirements)

• Airspace Users and Providers Qualification and Training (crew/ATC skill set, training, 

certification, and currency)

Other research in this phase includes activities to support safety case validation and the 

associated mitigations. This includes case-by-case assessments to determine the likelihood that a

system/operation can achieve an acceptable safety level. The research will consider UAS 

operational and technical risks including: 

• Inability to avoid a collision

• Inability to maintain positive control

• Inability to meet operational environment’s expected behavior

• Inability to safeguard the public
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

19

Summary of “Accommodation” Priorities

Accommodation of UAS in the NAS through evaluation and improvement of safety mitigations

Work with industry and the ARC to review the operational, pilot, and airworthiness regulations

Development of required standards to support technological solutions to identified operational 

gaps. (MOPS)

Safety Case Validation for UAS operations in NAS—collect/analyze operational and safety data 

Robust research, modeling, and simulation for UAS Sense and Avoid, C2, and Human Factors

3.8 Test Ranges

The FAA will coordinate with and leverage the resources of NASA and the DoD to establish six 

test ranges no later than 180 days from the enactment (February 14, 2012) of the FAA 

Modernization and Authorization Act of 2012. The test ranges will take into consideration 

climate and geographic diversity, the location of ground infrastructure and research needs. A 

project at a test range will be operational no later than 180 days after the date on which a project 

is established. See Section 7.7 for specific goals and metrics.

The test range program will address and account for:

- Manned-unmanned operations,

- Certification standards and air traffic requirements at test ranges,

- Coordinate and leverage NASA and DoD resources

- Civil and public unmanned aircraft systems,

- Coordination with the Next Generation Air Transportation System

- Provide a verification mechanism for safe operations before unmanned aircraft are 

integrated into the national airspace system.
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

20

4 Perspective 2: Integration

4.1 Overview

In the mid-term, emphasis will shift significantly from accommodation to integration. For the 

residual accommodation requirements, it is expected that operational lessons learned and 

technological advances will lead to more sophisticated mitigations with increased safety margins. 

Thus, COAs and SAC-ECs will remain avenues for accessing the NAS, but emphasis will shift 

toward integration of UAS through the implementation of civil standards for unmanned aircraft 

pilots and UAS certification, together with necessary policy guidance and operational 

procedures. 

Integration efforts will focus on sequentially developing and implementing the UAS system 

requirements established by the FAA:

• Finalize the integrated set of FAA policy, operational guidance, procedures, and 

standards 

• Define continued airworthiness methodologies

• Complete training and certification standardization

• Continue the technology development and assessment work that underpins the ability of 

UAS to operate safely and efficiently in the NAS

Research is needed to help define the UAS certification basis that supports necessary equipment 

design for the approval of technology development intended to receive civil certification under 

existing or adapted/expanded regulations, guidance, and standards. While current regulations, 

guidance, and standards assure safe operation of aircraft with pilots in the cockpit, these may not 

represent the necessary and sufficient basis for the design and operation of UAS.

Integration efforts will provide a foundation for creating and modifying FAA policies and 

procedures to permit more routine forms of UAS access and bridge the gap to the long-term goal 

of developing the policy, guidance, and operational procedures required to enable manned and 

unmanned aircraft to fly together in an environment that meets or exceeds today’s level of safety 

and efficiency. As new UAS evolve, more specific training will be developed for UAS Pilot, 

Crew Member, and Certified Flight Instructor (CFI). See Section 7.2 for specific goals and 

metrics.

UAS operations comingled at airports with manned aircraft is one of the more significant

challenges to NAS integration. The UAS must be able to operate within airport parameters and 

comply with the existing provisions for aircraft. As with airspace operational requirements, the 

airport standards are not expected to change with the introduction of UAS, and their operation 

must be harmonized in the provision of air traffic services.

4.2 Standards

After MASPS are completed, the emphasis of standards activities will be geared towards the 

development of MOPS, which will contribute to the basis for regulatory changes and the 

equipment standards for UAS-specific systems and equipment. The development of MOPS may
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

21

provide the necessary and sufficient requirement for invocation as Technical Standard Orders for 

airworthiness approval on certificated unmanned aircraft and may lead to the development of 

improved systems, potentially applicable to all civil aircraft. See Section 7 for specific goals and 

metrics.

4.3 Rules and Regulations

Recognizing that the UAS community might be better served by specific rules, the FAA is 

proposing to amend its regulations to adopt specific rules for the operation of small unmanned

aircraft systems (sUAS) in the NAS. These changes will address the classification of sUAS, 

certification of sUAS pilots, registration of sUAS, approval of sUAS operations, and sUAS 

operational limits. 

The establishment of the sUAS Rule will provide experience for pilots and additional data to 

determine an “operational” case for UAS flying safely and efficiently in the NAS. Although the 

sUAS airspace and performance requirements are constrained, there will be an opportunity to 

adapt and improve the sUAS rule and to leverage or expand its application to other UAS based 

on data analysis and lessons learned. As the first rule for UAS, it will establish a separate 

regulatory framework for sUAS operated in visual line-of-sight of the pilot. It will enable 

commercial operations by civil operators and establish an initial basis for sUAS crew 

certification and requirements.

Once adopted, the proposed regulation will alleviate the need for sUAS operators to conduct 

operations under either a COA or an SAC-EC. This will result in a reduction of workload and 

backlog to both the operators and the FAA, which will allow each to shift the focus of resources

to other solutions that will better enable UAS integration. See Section 7.6 for specific goals and 

metrics.

4.4 Certification of the UAS

The UAPO will work with the UAS community in defining an acceptable UAS certification 

basis. This may involve the development of new policy, guidance, special conditions and 

methods of compliance. See Section 7.1 for specific goals and metrics.

4.5 Procedures and Airspace

There will be incremental increases in NAS access based on rigorous safety mitigations of 

current UAS which were previously developed and built without approved industry or 

governmental standards, other than the current 14 CFR. As integration begins, there will be 

approved airspace and procedures for small UAS, which will provide a basis for developing 

plans for increased NAS access as UAS are certified. To support this, ATO goals will be:

• Develop airport facility integration plans, this will require research and the development 

of procedures that address critical issues such as low visibility, taxi spacing, light gun 

signals and compatibility with NextGen operations.

• Establish UAS operating requirements with associated ATC procedures for airport 

conditions 
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

22

4.6 Training (Pilot, Flightcrew Member, and Air Traffic Controller)

The FAA’s role in training is to establish policy, guidance and standards. Flight instructor, pilot, 

and crew member training standards are under development. These standards will be 

synchronized with the regulatory guidance. Civil operators normally develop training regimen 

that allows pilots and flight support to meet regulatory standards.

Flightcrew performance standards for small UAS will be determined before the sUAS rule 

becomes effective and the FAA begins issuing UAS pilot certificates. Activities needed to 

enable the rule include: 

• Training of ASIs at the FSDO level to provide practical test oversight

• Designation of Pilot Examiners (DPE) to assist the FSDOs

• Development of a UAS handbook for pilot and instructors 

• Development of Practical Test Standards (PTS) and UAS pilot knowledge test 

question bank

Pilot endorsements will be developed for specific UAS make and model to permit commercial 

operations. Pilot qualifications by make and model will be built into training and will be 

expanded based on pilot experience.

Training standards development will be more complex for UAS with unique operating 

parameters and will continue into the long-term, as these UAS are certified. 

Regardless of the UAS platform, similar types of training regimens are expected; consisting of a

written test, practical exam, and evaluations or check-rides. There will be a requirement for 

currency and proficiency; qualified ASIs will be fielded to regional offices across the country. 

With the introduction of UAS into the NAS, additional training requirements specific to different 

types of UAS characteristics may be required for ATC personnel, including UAS performance, 

behavior, communications, unique flight profiles, ATC standardized procedures, lost link/fly 

away profiles, operating limitations and emergency procedures. Controller training will include 

differences in interoperability between manned and UAS flights, with a focus on specific 

handling issues of the aircraft. This training must be administered to ATC facilities throughout 

the NAS. Controllers will handle UAS just as manned aircraft; therefore, no special ATC 

certification will be required. See Section 7.2 for specific goals and metrics.

4.7 R&D / Technology

Sense and Avoid:

Research on SAA sensor performance, data communication, and algorithms must provide 

solutions for safe separation for integration of UAS into the NAS. Research to develop 

separation algorithms will be accomplished with JPDO R&D Plan goals of:

• Flight demonstration of Self-Separation (SS) and Collision Avoidance (CA) algorithms, 

with multiple sensors and intruders
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

23

• Assessment of the performance of various SS concepts as a function of surveillance data 

configurations, and evaluation of risk-based SS algorithms and policy issues

• Assessment of the performance of various Separation Assurance (SA) concepts, and 

flight demonstration of SA algorithms, with criteria-based separation

Although research will continue, fully certified UA-based collision avoidance solutions may not 

be feasible until the long-term and are deemed to be a necessary component for full UAS NAS 

integration. This will include research on safe and efficient terminal airspace and ground 

operations, followed by ground demonstrations of autonomous airfield navigation and ATC 

interaction. See Section 7.4 for specific goals and metrics.

Control and Communications:

Advanced research is required in data link management, spectrum analysis, and frequency 

management. Efforts will focus on completing development of C2 link assurance and mitigation 

technologies and methods for incorporating them into the development of certification of the 

UAS. This will include:

• Allocation of satellite communication spectrum from the International 

Telecommunications Union through its World Radio Telecommunication Conference

• Verification and validation of control communication final performance requirements

• Establishment of UAS control link national/international standards

• Development and validation of technologies to mitigate vulnerabilities

Complete characterization of the capacity and performance impact of UAS on ATC 

communication systems will be completed. See Section 7.5 for specific goals and metrics.

Human Factors:

Human Factors research will continue in the areas of human-machine interface (both control 

station displays and ATC displays), automation, and migration of control. Human factors data 

collected in the near-term and mid-term will be analyzed to determine the safest technologies and 

best procedures for pilots and ATC controllers to interact with each other and with the aircraft; 

these results will influence technology and operations research. For separation and collision 

avoidance capability, the contribution of human decision-making versus automation must be 

identified.

Summary of “Integration” Priorities

“Equivalent visual” flight operations standards defined

Public Issuance of sUAS rule

C2 link standards defined for integrity, latency, and continuity

FAA acceptance of MASPS to enable development of detailed MOPS

Published FAA policy, operational guidance, and define an acceptable UAS certification basis

Published FAA flightcrew training and certification standards
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

24

5 Perspective 3: Evolution

5.1 Overview

Overlaying the integration of UAS is the need to remain aware of the changing characteristics 

and requirements of the evolving NAS. The long-term focus for UAS operations is the 

refinement and updating of regulation, policy, and standards. The end-state is to implement 

streamlined processes for the continued integration of UAS into the NAS. 

These efforts will include:

• Policy, operational guidance, and standards for civil aircraft airworthiness and NAS 

operations

• Continued airworthiness methodologies

• Training and certification standardization 

• Certification of key technologies to enable continued operations of UAS in the NAS

5.2 Standards

A UAS certification basis will have been determined. MASPS, MOPS and TSOs will support 

the regulations and certification of key systems for each UAS. Additionally, all standards will be 

evaluated and modified, as needed. See Section 7 for specific goals and metrics.

5.3 Rules and Regulations

Lessons learned from developing and implementing previous rules are directly applicable to the 

development of various UAS rules and regulations. The process will accelerate as UAS 

experience is gained and data analysis proves safety cases more quickly. Rulemaking activities 

will enter a phase of evolution rather than creation of new UAS-based rules.

5.4 Certification of the UAS

Certification of UAS will evolve as future technologies evolve and will be consistent with all 

other aircraft airworthiness and operational approval processes, adding more capability to the 

UAS through data analyses, and trending which will identify areas for change and improvement 

in operations, human factors, communication links, and maintenance. See Section 7.1 for 

specific goals and metrics.

5.5 Procedures and Airspace

Certified pilots and UAS will be permitted access into the NAS under seamless operating 

procedures. The need to accommodate special NAS access will be dramatically reduced, and 

will be limited to research and development or test operations.

UAS operations will continue to evolve based on NextGen requirements.

5.6 Training (Pilot, Flightcrew Member, and Air Traffic Controller)
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

25

As new UAS evolve, more specific training will be developed for UAS Pilot, Crew Member, and 

Certified Flight Instructor (CFI) based on lessons learned and data collection. See Section 7.2 for 

specific goals and metrics.

5.7 R&D / Technology

Identified limitations and gaps will be closed via research and development of required 

technologies that meet standards established by the FAA. Planned activities include:

• Sense and Avoid research that focuses on algorithm development and compatibility with 

current and future manned aircraft collision avoidance systems such as TCAS and ADSB, as well as compatibility with ATC separation management procedures and tools

• Research on UAS system safety and levels of autonomy for the improvement of UAS 

into the future

• Examination of potential concepts for the wide-spread integration of UAS into the future 

NextGen environment 

• Research on new tools and techniques to support avionics and control software 

development and certification, to ensure their safety and reliability.

Organized studies will continue to investigate the evolution of UAS operations into the NextGen 

environment. Detailed research on “equivalent visual” flight operations, using certified sensor 

systems, could allow aircraft to maintain safe distances from other aircraft during flight 

conditions that would not be appropriate for visual flight in a manned aircraft. This capability 

would rely heavily on net-enabled information, precision navigation, and cooperative 

surveillance, and would require the development and integration of NextGen-representative 

technologies for traffic, weather, and terrain avoidance. This conceptual model will be enlarged

with sensors that expand the ability to maintain separation from other aircraft past the current 

visual spectrum and flight conditions restrictions.

Summary of “Evolution” Priorities

Seamless operations of certified UAS and crew members in the evolving NAS

Published FAA TSOs based on system level MOPS

Certified Sense and Avoid algorithm for collision avoidance
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

26

6 Key Messages

6.1 Summary

The safe integration of unmanned aircraft into the NAS is a significant challenge. The FAA is 

dedicated to pursuing the resources required to develop the technical and regulatory standards,

policy guidance, and operational procedures on which successful UAS integration depends.

The application of financial and human resources by academia and industry to support critical 

FAA initiatives will shorten the time required to develop technical and regulatory standards. 

Together, all stakeholders can overcome the challenge of integrating UAS into the NAS and to 

better utilize UAS and associated technologies for the greater benefit of society.

6.2 List of Key Messages

Based on the FAA Policy and the challenges that need to be addressed, this roadmap has focused

on the activities required to achieve full integration of UAS into the evolving NAS. Throughout 

the process, these key messages reflect the basis for the FAA’s consideration of requirements to 

integrate civil UAS into the NAS.

1) Government-industry collaboration is paramount to success and must focus on 

process, quality, and timely results.

The FAA expects to gain experience with applying the existing airworthiness regulations 

during the type certification process with early UAS adopters. We also expect to get 

input from industry and the ARC. Taking into account industry and ARC inputs, and 

future experience with UAS type certification projects, the FAA will review and revise as 

necessary the existing airworthiness regulations to ensure UAS safety.

2) The FAA must remain committed to the development of technical and regulatory 

standards, policy guidance, and operations procedures on which successful UAS 

integration depends.

With this Roadmap, the FAA has outlined a series of sequenced initiatives that must be 

accomplished. Because unmanned aircraft are considered aircraft that are flown by 

pilots, existing regulations and procedures are largely applicable. However, the 

complete integration of UAS at airports and in the various airspace classes may 

necessitate the development of UAS-specific regulations and supplemental procedures, 

while complying with the guiding principles addressed in this document.

3) Global standards encourage harmonization and yield cost-effective development.

The FAA is not bound by international policies and standards. However, 

harmonizing efforts with the international aviation community will allow for more 

seamless operations of UAS across national boundaries. Synchronizing efforts 

within the aviation community will also permit better utilization of limited human 

and fiscal resources, thereby reducing the time required to produce regulatory 

guidance, policy, and standards.

4) FAA is focused on increased access for UAS without impacting the safety or 

efficiency of the NAS.
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

27

The FAA has placed a high priority on delivery of a small UAS rule in the near 

term that will allow increased UAS access to the NAS and the initial opportunity 

for commercial operations. In the long term, the principle objective of the 

aviation regulatory framework is to achieve and maintain the highest possible 

uniform level of safety while maintaining or increasing the efficiency of the NAS. 

In the case of UAS, this means ensuring the safety of all airspace users as well as 

the safety of persons and property on the ground.

5) Progress must be made on the development of technology to enable NAS access.

Because of many distinct differences from manned aircraft, there are required

technologies that must be matured to enable the safe and seamless integration of UAS 

into non-segregated airspace. Research will be focused in the areas of sense and avoid, 

control and communications, and human factors.
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

28

7 Goals and Metrics

This section identifies the key goals to be accomplished in accommodating, integrating, and 

evolving UAS operations in the NAS. The goals are, for the most part, intended to be addressed 

concurrently. For each goal, a set of metrics (i.e., well-defined milestones with target 

completion dates) are defined. The metrics help establish and maintain common government and 

industry expectations, and enable objective assessments of the progress made toward the 

accomplishment of each goal. The goals and metrics reflect the incremental approach to UAS 

certification and integration described in this roadmap.

The goals and metrics in and of themselves do not constitute a UAS integration roadmap 

implementation plan; however, they do establish a set of set of strategic objectives that can guide 

the definition of activities, schedules, and resource requirements in such a plan. Many of the 

goals and metrics are not under the FAA’s direct control and are dependent upon industry efforts 

such as participation in civil UAS standards development activities and execution of Pathfinder 

programs to aid in the establishment of certification requirements.

The goals and metrics are summarized in Appendix C. Near-term metrics (i.e., those with target 

dates between 2012 and 2015, inclusive) are identified by month and year. Mid-term metrics 

(between 2016 and 2020, inclusive) and far-term metrics (beyond 2020) typically only have a 

target year specified, and some have no target year specified. All the target dates are exactly that 

– targets. They are not commitments, either by the FAA, other government organizations, or 

industry. The target dates were established with full awareness and consideration of on-going 

and planned government and industry activities and schedules; however, they were not 

constrained by these activities and schedules. Many of the target dates are aggressive and likely 

will require additional resources and activities if they are to be met. The specific requirements 

for meeting the target dates can only be determined through establishment of a roadmap 

implementation plan. 

Although this roadmap is focused on the integration of civil UAS in the NAS, some of the goals 

and metrics address public UAS integration activities – primarily those of the DoD. Public 

entities establish their own certification requirements and processes, which typically build upon 

the requirements and processes established by the FAA for civil aviation. Since the DoD has 

significant experience with UAS development and operation and since it has an urgent and 

rapidly growing need to operate a wide variety of UAS in the NAS, the DoD’s significant 

activities to develop certification bases for public UAS can and should be leveraged in the 

FAA’s establishment of civil UAS certification requirements.

7.1 Certification Requirements (Airworthiness, Production, Operator)

Note: The term “Operator” is used here as defined by the FAA for passenger/cargo 

carrying and other “for hire and compensation” operations. Not all UAS operations conducted 

for hire and compensation will require an Operator Certificate. One outcome of this effort will 

be to establish which UAS operations will or will not require an Operator Certificate. 
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

29

Goal 1: FAA’s classification and draft basis of certification established for all types of UAS in 

2012.

A. FAA’s UAS classification strategy finalized and communicated by Dec 2012. 

o Explanation. A baseline classification is a required first step in developing 

regulations or consensus standards.

B. FAA’s draft basis of certification established by Dec 2012. 

o Explanation. This will most likely be modifications to existing requirements 

and/or consensus-based standards established for manned aircraft.

 

C. Pathfinder certification programs defined through government-industry partnerships by 

Dec 2012. 

o Explanation. Industry is willing to participate in supporting UAS platform 

certification under appropriate, existing certification regulations to establish a 

basis for modifying existing rules or establishing new rules specific to UAS. This 

will act as a catalyst to establish the process to be used for UAS certification. It

has the potential to significantly reduce the time/effort required by future UAS 

certification applicants.

Goal 2: FAA’s draft certification requirements are available in 2013.

D. FAA’s initial certification requirements defined for UAS ground station, airframe, control 

system, propulsion system, ground support equipment (GSE), etc. by Dec 2013. 

o Explanation. Requirements for all UAS system components must be established. 

Requirements can be identified and refined as a result of previous Pathfinder 

efforts, publication of ASTM consensus standards, and related ongoing efforts of 

RTCA. Timely establishment of requirements will advance and expedite industry 

technology investment and development in UAS design and function.

E. Pathfinder certification programs underway by Jan 2013. 

o Explanation. See explanation above for Pathfinder programs.

F. Other UAS certification programs defined by Dec 2013.

o Explanation. The basis for certification requirements will be driven by early 

establishment of Small UAS (sUAS) Rule (Part 107). As certification rules begin 

evolving in 2012-2013, lessons learned can be applied to larger platforms.

Goal 3: FAA’s minimum certification requirements established by 2015.

G. FAA’s minimum certification requirements for UAS ground station, airframe, control 

system, propulsion system, GSE, etc. published by Dec 2015. 

o Explanation. Lessons learned from certification of Pathfinder systems, 

publication of consensus standards, and additional operational experience gained 

as a result of sUAS Rule publication will provide the necessary data to finalize 
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

30

full system certification requirements.

H. Other UAS certification programs underway by Dec 2014. 

o Explanation. Once the Pathfinder programs are underway, other certification 

programs should be able to be started based on results of the Pathfinder programs.

I. Pathfinder certification programs completed by Dec 2015.

o Explanation. It is expected that some certifications will be granted under existing 

rules and requirements by this date.

J. Other certification programs completed by Dec 2015.

o Explanation. Lessons learned from certification of Pathfinder systems, 

publication of consensus standards, and additional operational experience gained 

as a result of the sUAS Rule will provide the necessary data to finalize 

certification requirements. It is expected that some system certifications will be 

granted under these new requirements by this date.

Goal 4. FAA certification requirements updated and systems certified as necessary.

K Certification requirements updated as necessary.

o Explanation. Self-explanatory.

L. UAS certified as necessary.

o Explanation. Self-explanatory.

7.2 Certification Requirements (Pilot/Crew)

Goal 1: FAA certification requirements for pilots and crew members for all UAS classes 

(including medical requirements, training standards, etc.) published by 2013 and 

updated as necessary.

A. FAA decision to develop draft requirements itself. 

o Explanation. The certification and medical requirements included in the FAA’s 

sUAS rule should form the basis for all classes of UAS. Existing CFR 14 Part 61 

pilot certificate regulations and some logical adaptation of CFR 14 Part 67 

Medical Requirements should be readily applicable to UAS. The FAA already 

has decided to develop these draft requirements itself, and is working on them 

now. 

B. Draft requirements developed by Dec 2013.

o Explanation. Adaptation of existing regulations regarding record keeping, 

logging of flight time, recent experience, etc. found in CFR 14 Parts 61, 91, 141, 

and 142 provide a ready baseline to establish requirements. 
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

31

C. FAA publishes final requirements by Jun 2014. 

o Explanation. Once the draft requirements are established, final requirements 

should be made available within six months.

D. Requirements updated as necessary.

o Explanation. Self-explanatory.

Goal 2: Necessary changes to record keeping systems established.

E. Changes to FAA and industry record keeping systems completed by Dec 2014. 

o Explanation. Once the final requirements are established, some changes to 

existing record keeping systems likely will be necessary.

7.3 Ground-Based Sense and Avoid (GBSAA)

Goal 1: GBSAA operations fully approved by FAA for routine use by DoD and other public 

entities by 2013.

A. FAA approvals for use of GBSAA at all DoD GBSAA test sites granted by Dec 2012. 

o Explanation. Utilize US Army and US Air Force-developed solutions at DoD 

UAS test sites. (Note: These are existing DoD GBSAA test sites, not the new test 

ranges discussed in Sections 3.8 and 7.7.) Gain FAA approval for use of GBSAA 

to provide sense-and-avoid (SAA) functionality and meet SAA requirement for 

operation of UAS at these test sites.

B. FAA approvals for use of GBSAA for educational and other public applications granted 

by Dec 2013.

o Explanation. As above, but expanded beyond DoD to include public use and at 

any locations equipped with GBSAA.

Goal 2: GBSAA operations fully approved by the FAA for routine use by all aviation, including 

both public and civil entities (if needed), by 2015.

C. FAA approvals for use of GBSAA for limited civil applications granted by Jan 2014. 

o Explanation. As with FAA operational approvals for use of GBSAA at all DoD 

GBSAA test sites and operational approvals for use of GBSAA for educational 

and other public applications, expanded approvals are expected to be granted for 

limited civil use at select locations.

D. FAA’s initial GBSAA certification standards for civil operations established by Jan 2014. 

o Explanation. Assimilate prior deployment experience for DoD, public, and 

limited civil use, and develop MASPS for GBSAA.

E. FAA approvals for use of GBSAA for civil applications granted by Dec 2014. 
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

32

o Explanation. Self-explanatory.

F. FAA’s final GBSAA certification standards for civil operations established by Dec 2014. 

o Explanation. Self-explanatory.

G. GBSAA certification standards updated as necessary.

o Explanation. Self-explanatory.

7.4 Airborne-Based Sense and Avoid (ABSAA)

 

Goal 1: Initial FAA certification of ABSAA that facilitates UAS operations without the 

requirement for a visual observer by 2014.

A. Initial proposal for SAA implementation, integration, and operation in an industry 

Pathfinder program released by Apr 2014. (See Section 7.1 for the Pathfinder program goals 

and metrics.)

o Explanation. This industry proposal will address: a) UAS operations 

requirements, b) specific UAS sense-and-avoid requirements at the proposed 

operating site(s), c) UAS ABSAA equipage requirements, including ADS-B, 

TCAS, and non-cooperative sensors, and d) installation and integration of the 

initial, proposed SAA system(s). (“System” includes both hardware and 

software.)

B. FAA “Issue Paper(s)” on UAS SAA implementation in one or more Pathfinder programs 

released by Dec 2014.

o Explanation. The FAA “Issue Paper(s)” will document the special considerations 

for certification of initial UAS airborne systems that include SAA functions. 

They also will document special considerations for operating UAS that employ 

the initial ABSAA systems, and special considerations (including avionics 

equipage requirements) for manned aircraft operating simultaneously in the same 

airspace. 

Goal 2: Installation and certification of ABSAA for use by DoD, other public, and civil entities 

that provide the SAA functions required in the NAS for Classes A, E, and G airspace,

and operations approved without the requirement for a visual observer or a COA.

C. RTCA UAS MASPS Part I (operational and functional requirements) released by Dec 

2012.

o Explanation. This includes the overall, end-to-end civil UAS performance 

requirements, including the necessary portion of avionics onboard the unmanned 

aircraft and off aircraft subsystems that will enable operations in the NAS.
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

33

D. RTCA UAS MASPS Part II (safety and interoperability requirements) released by Dec 

2013.

o Explanation. This document includes the overall, end-to-end civil UAS 

performance requirements, including the necessary portion of avionics onboard 

the unmanned aircraft and off aircraft subsystems that will enable operations in 

the NAS. 

E. RTCA SAA MASPS released by Jun 2014. 

o Explanation. This document includes the requirements basis to develop 

Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) for SAA subsystems, 

including the SAA avionics onboard the unmanned aircraft and required elements 

of ground control systems.

F. RTCA SAA MOPS released by Dec 2015. 

o Explanation. This document includes the avionics onboard the UAS and required 

elements of ground control systems. 

G. FAA SAA TSO issued by 2016.

o Explanation. This document includes the avionics onboard the UAS and required 

elements of ground control systems. 

H. FAA SAA TSO’d equipment used operationally in 2016.

o Explanation. Self-explanatory.

Goal 3: DoD or other public entity certification of initial ABSAA systems that enable the DoD 

and other public entities to safely operate ABSAA-equipped UAS in all NAS airspace 

classes without the need for a COA.

I. Initial proposal for ABSAA implementation, integration, and operation in one or more 

programs released by 2017.

o Explanation. This proposal will address the requirements for ABSAA system(s), 

including ADS-B, TCAS and non-cooperative sensing. (“System” includes both 

hardware and software.)

J. FAA “Issue Paper(s)” on UAS SAA implementation in one or more programs for UAS 

operations in all NAS airspace classes released by 2018.

o Explanation. The FAA “Issue Paper(s)” will document the special considerations 

for certification of UAS airborne systems that include SAA functions. They also 

will document special considerations for operating UAS that employ these 

ABSAA systems, and special considerations (including avionics equipage 

requirements) for manned aircraft operating in the same airspace.

Goal 4: Installation and certification of ABSAA systems for use by DoD, other public, and civil 

entities that provide the SAA functions that facilitate integrated operation of manned and 

unmanned aircraft in all NAS airspace classes by 2020.
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

34

K. Initial RTCA UAS MASPS released by 2016.

o Explanation. This document includes requirements for the overall, end-to-end 

civil UAS, including the necessary portion of avionics onboard the aircraft and off 

aircraft subsystems that will enable operations in the NAS. 

L. RTCA SAA MASPS released by 2017. 

o Explanation. This document includes the SAA avionics onboard the aircraft and 

required elements of ground control systems.

M. RTCA SAA MOPS for all UAS subsystems released by 2019. The elements will include 

the avionics onboard the UAS and required elements of ground control systems. 

o Explanation. Self-explanatory.

N. FAA SAA TSO released by 2020.

o Explanation. This document will include the avionics onboard the aircraft and 

required elements of ground control systems. 

O. FAA SAA TSO’d equipment used operationally in 2020 and beyond.

o Explanation. Self-explanatory.

P. RTCA UAS MASPS and SAA MASPS and MOPS updated as necessary.

o Explanation. Self-explanatory.

Q. FAA SAA TSOs updated as necessary.

o Explanation. Self-explanatory.

7.5 Command and Control (C2)

Note: For purposes of this section, Line of Sight (LOS) means radio LOS - not visual LOS.

Goal 1: International agreements, industry standards, and FAA regulations and guidance 

material are established by 2015 for civil UAS command and control (C2) capabilities 

such that C2 subsystems can be certified by the FAA for use in FAA-approved UAS 

operations. 

Note: C2 includes communications internal to the UAS for pilots to operate unmanned aircraft 

from ground control stations. C2 also includes communications external to the UAS for 

pilots of unmanned aircraft to interact with air traffic controllers and pilots of nearby 

aircraft, both manned and unmanned.

A. International agreement was reached in Feb 2012 at the International Telecommunications 

Union’s (ITU) World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC) on spectrum allocations 

for radio line-of-sight (LOS) UAS C2 links (or in ITU terminology, Control and NonPayload Communications [CNPC] links).
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

35

o Explanation. Internationally harmonized radio spectrum allocations are needed 

for UAS C2 links to help ensure their protection from unintentional radio 

frequency interference, to help ensure adequate spectral bandwidth is available for 

meeting the projected C2 link capacity demands, and to facilitate operation of 

UAS across international borders. While spectrum allocations also are needed for 

beyond-line-of-sight (BLOS) C2 links, the initial focus is on radio line-of-sight 

allocations for which agreements can be reached more easily and quickly, and for 

which the civil UAS demand is expected to be greater.

B. RTCA’s initial Minimum Aviation System Performance Standards (MASPS) for the 

overall, end-to-end C2 capability for civil UAS, including the necessary portion of 

avionics onboard the unmanned aircraft, the voice and data links, and the necessary 

portion of ground control systems published by Dec 2012. Note: In this context, 

“necessary portion” means the UAS elements involved in providing or enabling the C2 

capability.

o Explanation. Before C2 subsystem standards (including functional and 

performance requirements) can be developed, the minimum overall C2 

performance standards must be established. The MASPS must address all aspects 

of UAS C2, including all “internal” and “external” communications needed preflight, in-flight, and post-flight.

C. RTCA’s final MASPS for civil UAS C2 capabilities published by Jun 2013.

o Explanation. The civil UAS C2 MASPS are needed as a basis for RTCA to 

develop Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) for the C2 

subsystems, including the necessary portion of avionics onboard the unmanned 

aircraft, the voice and data links, and the necessary portion of ground control 

systems.

D. RTCA’s initial MOPS for all the UAS subsystems involved in providing or enabling 

radio line-of-sight C2 capabilities for civil UAS published by Jun 2014. These elements 

will include the necessary portion of avionics onboard the unmanned aircraft, the voice 

and data links, and the necessary portion of ground control systems.

o Explanation. The MOPS are needed for the FAA to incorporate in its regulations 

and guidance material. They form the basis upon which the FAA can certify 

systems and services used in providing C2 capabilities for civil UAS.

E. FAA’s initial regulations and guidance material (such as TSOs and Advisory Circulars) to 

enable the production, sale, installation, and maintenance of FAA-certified systems and 

services used in providing radio line-of-sight C2 capabilities for civil UAS published by 

Dec 2014. 

o Explanation. For the commercial marketplace to offer FAA-certified systems and 

services for use in providing C2 capabilities for civil UAS, the FAA must 

establish the necessary regulations and guidance material. These are expected to 

be based on and largely incorporate the consensus industry standards defined in 

the RTCA MOPS. 
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

36

F. International agreement reached at the ITU’s WRC 15 on radio spectrum allocations for 

beyond-line-of-sight (BLOS) UAS C2 links (or in ITU terminology, Control and NonPayload Communications [CNPC] links) by Dec 2015. 

o Explanation. Internationally harmonized radio spectrum allocations are needed 

for UAS C2 links to help ensure their protection from unintentional radio 

frequency interference, to help ensure adequate spectral bandwidth is available for 

meeting the projected C2 link capacity demands, and to facilitate operation of 

UAS across international borders. In the far term, some civil UAS operations are 

expected to require beyond line-of-sight C2 links, hence the need for this ITU 

agreement.

G. RTCA’s final MOPS for all the UAS subsystems involved in providing or enabling radio

line-of-sight C2 capabilities for civil UAS published by Jun 2015. These elements will 

include the necessary portion of avionics onboard the unmanned aircraft, the voice and 

data links, and the necessary portion of ground control systems. 

o Explanation. Revised MOPS likely will be needed based on lessons learned from 

industry application of the initial MOPS during product development and FAA 

certification activities.

H. FAA’s final regulations and guidance material to enable the production, installation, and 

maintenance of FAA-certified systems and services used in providing radio line-of-sight

C2 capabilities for civil UAS published by Dec 2015. 

o Explanation. A revised set of FAA regulations and guidance material likely will 

be needed based on lessons learned from application of the initial set.

I. Initial FAA-certified C2 subsystems intended for civil UAS operations are available

commercially by 2016. 

o Explanation. FAA-certified C2 subsystems for civil UAS are needed for 

operators to manufacturers to incorporate in their UASs, and for operators to 

obtain FAA approval for their UAS operations.

Goal 2: Beyond-line-of-sight (BLOS) C2 links and capabilities are addressed in the international 

agreements, industry standards, and FAA regulations and guidance material.

J. RTCA’s MOPS for all the UAS subsystems involved in providing or enabling beyondline-of-sight (BLOS) C2 capabilities for civil UAS published. Initial publication is in 

2016 and final publication is in 2017. These elements include the necessary portion of 

avionics onboard the unmanned aircraft, the voice and data links, and the necessary 

portion of ground control systems.

o Explanation. Self-explanatory.

K. FAA’s regulations and guidance material amended as necessary to address BLOS C2 

capabilities for civil UAS.

o Explanation. Self-explanatory.
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

37

L. FAA-certified C2 subsystems intended for civil UAS operations are available 

commercially.

o Explanation. Self-explanatory.

Goal 3: Adequate spectrum is allocated and available for both radio line-of-sight and beyondline-of-sight C2 links to meet the current and projected demand generated by civil UAS 

operations in the NAS.

M. International spectrum allocations for both LOS and BLOS UAS C2 links are reviewed 

at the WRC 2020 and revised as necessary and possible.

o Explanation. Self-explanatory.

7.6 Small UAS (sUAS) Rules

Goal 1: sUAS rule adopted for public operations.

A. Agreements (MOU, MOA, COA, etc.) among the FAA and DoD, DHS, NASA, NOAA, 

DOJ and other public entities finalized and signed in conjunction with the release of the 

sUAS Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). (Currently, the NPRM is expected to be 

released by Dec 2012, but this is subject to change).

o Explanation. The sUAS proposed rule has undergone a risk assessment by FAA 

through is Safety Management System (SMS) process. Adopting the provisions 

of the proposed rule for public operations may not constitute an additional safety 

risk, will accelerate NAS integration of small systems, and will facilitate a greater 

opportunity for data collection in support of the final rule. It will also reduce the 

number of COAs the FAA will need to process and free up FAA resources to 

address other time critical UAS in the NAS integration issues.

B. sUAS night operations experiments and final report completed by Sep 2012.

o Explanation. Night operations may be deemed as safe as or safer than daylight 

operations from a collision avoidance perspective with proper aircraft lighting. In 

addition to these focused experiments early consideration of operational data 

gathered by DoD and offshore entities should be immediately considered as 

relevant.

C. If night operations are deemed as safe or safer by the FAA, increased night operations for 

public entities are allowed by Dec 2012.

o Explanation. Public entities are requesting night operations as a means to fully 

exploit the capability of sUAS. 

D. Drafts of all required consensus standards necessary for the implementation of 

14CFR107 available to the public in conjunction with the release of the sUAS NPRM

(which currently is expected to occur by Dec 2012, but this is subject to change).

o Explanation. Over three years of consensus standard development have occurred.

When completed, these standards will provide meaningful guidance to 
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

38

manufacturers and end users for the design, construction, and operation of small 

UAS. The timely release of the standards will permit industry an opportunity to 

fully prepare for publication of a final rule, and provide useful guidance to public 

entities desiring UAS deployment prior to final rule release. Having these drafts 

available to entities reviewing the proposed sUAS rule will also allow for a more 

complete and thorough review of the rule since. Without these draft standards 

being available, it will be difficult to provide meaningful and constructive 

comments.

Goal 2: sUAS rule adoption for public and civil operations.

E. 14CFR107 published, consensus-based standards accepted by the FAA, and the FAA able 

to issue permits to operate by August 2014. 

o Explanation. In order for operations to be conducted under 14CFR107, the FAA 

must issue a Notice of Applicability of referenced consensus-basedstandards and 

it must have in place a process to issue permits to operate.

F. Update sUAS rules, guidance, and/or consensus-based standards after sufficient data have 

been gathered and analyzed by Dec 2015. 

o Explanation. Assuming a final rule implementation s, the FAA will have over 1.5

years of data for sUAS operating under 14CFR107. Advancements in technology 

and analysis of operational and safety data will provide the catalyst for refinement 

and improvement of Part 107 guidance and/or standards by this date.

G. Update sUAS rules, guidance, and/or consensus-based standards as necessary.

o Explanation. As more operational and safety data is accumulated it will provide a 

catalyst for refinement and improvement of 14CFR107 guidance and/or standards 

as necessary.

7.7 Test Ranges

Goal 1: FAA program to integrate UAS into the NAS at six test ranges established by Aug 2012.

o Explanation. In order to establish this program selection criteria and procedures must 

be developed and communicated to prospective site operators. Test areas should then 

be evaluated by the FAA in collaboration with NASA and the DoD. Test areas 

criteria should take into consideration geographic and climate diversity, the location 

of ground infrastructure, and research needs. 

Goal 2: Test ranges selected by FAA by Dec 2012.

o Explanation. Any test range selected should provide the FAA, NASA, DoD, Industry 

and Academia with the opportunity for UAS prototype development and deployment. 

Test range policy and procedures should enable manned-unmanned cooperation. 
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

39

Goal 3. Selected test ranges operational by Jun 2013. 

o Explanation. The FAA Reauthorization Act requires that “the test range shall be 

operational no later than 180 days after the date on which a project is established.” 

This is assumed to be 180 days after the selection of the test ranges is made.

Goal 4. Test range program operational until Feb 2017, unless extended.

o Explanation. The FAA Reauthorization Act requires that the test range program be 

terminated by Feb 2017. However, if this program is successful then termination may 

not be desired or necessary.

7.8 Miscellaneous

Goal 1: Update the FAA UAS Integration Roadmap annually through 2015.

A. Updated FAA UAS Integration Roadmap published annually. 

o Explanation. Self-explanatory.

Goal 2: Develop a comprehensive plan by 2013 for safely integrating UAS operations in the 

NAS by 2015.

B. The 2006 Airspace Integration Plan is reviewed and updated by the FAA’s UAS ARC by 

Nov 2012.

o Explanation. The 2006 Airspace Integration Plan is a modified version of the 

Airspace Integration plan developed under the government-industry Access 5 

program. The original plan was restructured to more directly address the 8 major 

challenges with UAS integration in the NAS as the FAA envisioned at that time. 

The purpose of this activity is to review and update that plan to ensure it is up to 

date, reflects current thinking about what is required to integrate UASs into the 

NAS, and addresses the goals and metrics documented in this roadmap. The plan 

also will be updated to include what has happened since 2006 and what is 

currently being accomplished or planned by various government organizations 

(including FAA, DoD, NASA, and DHS). Once this is done, the plan will be used 

to identify gaps where a requirement has been identified but no organization is 

working on satisfying that requirement. It will also identify any duplication of 

effort discovered during this review. Once these gaps/duplications of effort are 

identified, the resources required to address the gaps and recommended 

organizations to perform the work will be provided. If any duplications of effort 

are identified, the ARC will provide recommendations for addressing them.

C. UAS ARC recommendations for changes to FAA, DoD, DHS, NASA, and industry

programs are provided to the FAA by Dec 2012. 

o Explanation. Once the UAS ARC has completed its review and update of the 

2006 Airspace Integration Plan, it will provide recommendations to the FAA for 

addressing the gaps/duplication of efforts identified. These recommendations will 

include proposed changes to existing and planned programs.
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

40

Goal 3: Identify air traffic management system changes required to be implemented in NextGen.

D. UAS are addressed in the FAA’s 2012 NextGen Implementation Plan by Dec 2012.

o Explanation. This will require explicitly addressing the operation of UAS in the 

NAS, and the evolution of enabling system capabilities in the various NextGen 

Segment Implementation Plans (NSIP)Although no significant changes to the 

current NAS and future NextGen are expected to be necessary for the integration 

of UAS operations in unrestricted airspace, some system and procedure changes 

will be necessary. Identifying these changes is necessary to incorporate them in 

the NextGen Implementation Plan as soon as possible, so that appropriate 

adjustments to program baselines can be made.

E. UAS are addressed in FAA’s NextGen Enterprise Architecture by Dec 2012.

o Explanation. This will require explicitly addressing the integration of UAS 

operations in the NAS, including the necessary operational concepts and system 

capabilities. The NextGen Enterprise Architecture defines the operational and 

technical aspects of NextGen. Currently, it does not explicitly identify whatever is 

needed to integrate UAS operations in unrestricted airspace. It must do so such 

that the necessary changes can be incorporated into the appropriate NextGen 

program implementation plans.

Goal 4: Develop UAS operational scenarios.

F. RTCA and FAA-defined operational scenarios are provided to the UAS ARC by Aug 

2012.

o Explanation. A rich set of operational scenarios is needed to develop a complete 

set of operational requirements, from which system functional and performance 

requirements can be derived. While nominal operations are important to define, it 

is essential that off-nominal operations are defined for conceivable contingency 

situations. The latter are what truly drive system requirements.

G. UAS ARC completes its review of draft UAS operational scenarios, and provides its 

comments to the FAA by Sep 2012.

o Explanation. The UAS ARC was established, in part, to review key FAA 

products, such as the UAS operational scenarios. The ARC is well positioned to 

critically assess the FAA’s draft operational scenarios.
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

41

Appendix C

Goals and Metrics Summary

7.1 Certification Requirements (Airworthiness, Production, Operator) 

Goals and Metrics Summary

Time 

Frame

Near Term Mid Term Far Term

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016-2020 2020+

Goals 1. FAA’s 

classification 

and draft 

basis of 

certification 

established 

for all types 

of UAS

2. FAA’s draft 

certification 

requirements 

are available

3. FAA’s minimum certification 

requirements established

4. FAA certification requirements 

updated and systems certified 

as necessary

Regulations 

& Guidance

Metrics

A. FAA’s UAS 

classification 

strategy 

finalized and 

communicated 

by Dec 2012

B. FAA’s draft 

basis of 

certification 

established by 

Dec 2012 

D. FAA’s initial 

certification 

requirements 

defined for 

UAS ground 

station, 

airframe, 

control system, 

propulsion 

system, ground 

support 

equipment 

(GSE), etc. by 

Dec 2013 

G. FAA’s 

minimum 

certification 

requirements 

for UAS 

ground 

station, 

airframe, 

control 

system, 

propulsion 

system, GSE, 

etc. published 

by Dec 2015 

K. Certification requirements 

updated as necessary

Product

Metrics

C. Pathfinder 

certification 

programs 

defined 

through 

governmentindustry 

partnerships 

by Dec 2012

E. Pathfinder 

certification 

programs 

underway by 

Jan 2013

F. Other 

certification 

programs 

defined by 

Dec 2013 

H. Other 

certification 

programs 

underway by 

Dec 2014 

 

I. Pathfinder 

certification 

programs 

completed by 

Dec 2015

J. Other 

certification 

programs 

completed by 

Dec 2015 

L. UAS certified as necessary
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

42

7.2 Certification Requirements (Pilot/Crew) Goals and Metrics Summary

Time Frame

Near Term Mid Term Far Term

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016-2020 2020+

Goals 1. Pilot and crew member FAA certification requirements for pilots and crews for all UAS classes (including

medical requirements, training standards, etc.) published by 2013 and updated as necessary

2. Necessary changes to record keeping systems established

Regulations 

& Guidance

Metrics

A. FAA 

decision to 

develop draft 

requirements

itself

[Decision 

made.]

B. Draft 

requirements 

developed by 

Dec 2013

C. FAA 

publishes 

final

requirements 

by Jun 2014

E. Changes to 

FAA and 

industry 

record 

keeping 

systems 

completed by 

Dec 2014

D. Requirements updated as necessary
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

43

7.3 Ground-Based Sense and Avoid (GBSAA) Goals and Metrics Summary

Time Frame

Near Term Mid Term Far Term

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016-2020 2020+

Goals 1. GBSAA operations fully approved 

by FAA for routine use by DoD 

and other public entities by 2013

2. GBSAA operations fully 

approved by the FAA for routine 

use by all aviation, including 

both public and civil entities (if 

needed), by 2015

Standards

Metrics

D. FAA’s initial 

GBSAA 

certification 

standards for 

civil 

operations 

established 

by Jan 2014

F. FAA’s final 

GBSAA 

certification 

standards for 

civil 

operations 

established

by Dec 2014

G. GBSAA certification standards 

updated as necessary

Regulations 

& Guidance

Metrics

A. FAA 

approvals for

use of 

GBSAA at all 

DoD GBSAA 

test sites 

granted by 

Dec 2012

B. FAA 

approvals for

use of GBSAA 

for educational 

and other 

public 

applications

granted by 

Dec 2013

C. FAA 

approvals for

use of 

GBSAA for 

limited civil 

applications 

granted by 

Jan 2014

E. FAA 

approvals for

use of 

GBSAA for 

civil 

applications

granted by 

Dec 2014
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

44

7.4 Airborne-Based Sense and Avoid (ABSAA) Goals and Metrics Summary

Time Frame

Near Term Mid Term Far Term

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016-2020 2020+

Goal

1. Initial FAA certification of ABSAA that facilitates

UAS operations without the requirement for a visual 

observer by 2014

Regulations 

& Guidance

Metrics

A. Initial 

proposal for 

SAA 

implementation, 

integration, 

and operation 

in an industry 

Pathfinder 

program

released by 

Apr 2014

B. FAA “Issue 

Paper(s)” on 

UAS SAA 

implementation in one 

or more 

Pathfinder 

programs 

released by 

Dec 2014

Goal

2. Installation and certification of ABSAA for use by DoD, other public, and civil entities that provide the SAA 

functions required in the NAS for Classes A, E, and G airspace, and operations approved without the 

requirement for a visual observer or a COA

Standards

Metrics

C. RTCA UAS 

MASPS Part I

(operational 

and functional 

requirements)

released by 

Dec 2012

D. RTCA UAS 

MASPS Part II

(safety and 

interoperability 

requirements)

released by 

Dec 2013

E. RTCA SAA 

MASPS 

released by 

Dec 2014

F. RTCA SAA 

MOPS released 

by Dec 2015

Regulations 

& Guidance

Metrics

G. FAA SAA 

TSO issued by 

2016

Product

Metrics

 H. FAA SAA 

TSO’d 

equipment 

used 

operationally 

in 2016
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

45

7.4 Airborne-Based Sense and Avoid (ABSAA) Goals and Metrics Summary

Time Frame

Near Term Mid Term Far Term

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016-2020 2020+

Goal

3. DoD or other 

public entity 

certification of 

initial ABSAA 

systems that 

enable the DoD 

and other 

public entities 

to safely 

operate 

ABSAAequipped UAS 

in al NAS 

airspace classes 

without the 

need for a COA

Regulations 

& Guidance

Metrics

I. Initial 

proposal for 

ABSAA 

implementtation, 

integration, 

and operation 

in one or more 

programs

released by 

2017

Product

Metrics

J. FAA “Issue 

Paper(s)” on 

UAS SAA 

implementtation in one 

or more 

programs for 

UAS 

operations in 

all NAS 

airspace 

classes 

released by 

2018
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

46

7.4 Airborne-Based Sense and Avoid (ABSAA) Goals and Metrics Summary

Time Frame

Near Term Mid Term Far Term

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016-2020 2020+

Goal

4. Installation and 

certification of 

ABSAA for use 

by DoD, other 

public, and civil 

entities that 

provide the SAA 

functions that 

facilitate 

integrated 

operation of 

manned and 

unmanned 

aircraft in all 

NAS airspace 

classes by 2020

Standards

Metrics

K. Initial RTCA 

UAS MASPS 

released by 

2016

L. RTCA SAA 

MASPS 

released by 

2017

M. RTCA UAS 

SAA MOPS 

for all UAS 

subsystems

released by 

2019

P. RTCA UAS 

MASPS and 

SAA MASPS 

and MOPS 

updated as 

necessary

Regulations 

& Guidance

Metrics

N. FAA SAA 

TSO released 

by 2020

Q. FAA SAA 

TSOs updated 

as necessary

Product

Metrics

 O. FAA SAA TSO’d equipment 

used operationally in 2020 and 

beyond
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

47

7.5 Command and Control (C2) Goals and Metrics Summary

Time Frame

Near Term Mid Term Far Term

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016-2020 2020+

Goals 1. International agreements, industry standards, and FAA regulations 

and guidance material are established by 2015 for civil UAS 

command and control (C2) capabilities such that C2 subsystems can 

be certified by the FAA for use in FAA-approved UAS operations

2. BLOS C2 

links and 

capabilities 

are addressed

in the 

international 

agreements, 

industry 

standards, 

and FAA 

regulations 

and guidance 

material

3. Adequate 

spectrum is 

allocated and 

available for 

both radio LOS 

and BLOS C2 

links to meet 

the current and 

projected 

demand 

generated by 

civil UAS 

operations in 

the NAS

Spectrum

Metrics

A. International 

agreement was 

reached in Feb 

2012 at the 

ITU’s WRC 

on spectrum 

allocations for 

radio LOS 

UAS C2 links

F. International 

reached at 

ITU’s WRC 15

on radio 

spectrum 

allocations for 

BLOS UAS C2 

links by Dec 

2015

M. International 

spectrum 

allocations for 

both LOS and 

BLOS UAS 

C2 links 

reviewed at 

WRC 2020 

and revised as 

necessary and 

possible

Standards

Metrics

B. RTCA’s 

initial MASPS

for the overall 

C2 capability 

for civil UAS 

published by 

Dec 2012

C. RTCA’s final 

MASPS for 

civil UAS C2 

capabilities 

published by 

Jun 2013

D. RTCA’s 

initial MOPS 

for all UAS 

subsystems 

involved in 

radio line-ofsight C2 

capabilities for 

civil UAS

published by 

Jun 2014

G. RTCA’s final 

MOPS for all 

UAS 

subsystems 

involved in 

radio line-ofsight C2 

capabilities for 

civil UAS

published by 

Jun 2015

J. RTCA’s 

MOPS for all 

UAS 

subsystems 

involved in 

BLOS C2 

capabilities for 

civil UAS 

published

Initial – 2016

Final – 2017
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

48

7.5 Command and Control (C2) Goals and Metrics Summary

Time Frame

Near Term Mid Term Far Term

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016-2020 2020+

Regulations 

& Guidance

Metrics

E. FAA’s initial 

regulations and 

guidance 

material to 

enable 

production, 

sale, 

installation, 

and 

maintenance of 

FAA-certified 

systems and 

services for 

radio line-ofsight C2 

capabilities for 

civil UAS 

published by 

Dec 2014

H. FAA’s 

final 

regulations and 

guidance 

material to 

enable 

production, 

sale, 

installation, 

and 

maintenance of 

FAA-certified 

systems and 

services used 

in providing 

radio line-ofsight C2 

capabilities for 

civil UAS

published by 

Dec 2015

K. FAA’s

regulations 

and guidance 

material 

amended as 

necessary to 

address BLOS

C2 

capabilities

for civil UAS

Product

Metrics

 I. Initial FAAcertified 

UAS C2 

subsystems

intended for 

civil UAS 

operations are 

available 

commercially 

by 2016

L. FAA-certified 

C2 

subsystems 

intended for 

civil UAS 

operations 

are available

commercially 
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

49

7.6 Small UAS (sUAS) Goals and Metrics Summary

Time 

Frame

Near Term Mid Term Far Term

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016-2020 2020+

Goals 1. sUAS rule adopted for public 

operations

2. sUAS rule adoption for public and civil operations

Standards

Metrics

D. Drafts of all 

required 

consensus 

standards 

necessary 

for implementation of 

14CFR107 

available to 

the public in 

conjunction 

with the 

release of 

the sUAS 

NPRM

E. Consensusbased 

standards 

accepted by 

the FAA by 

August 2014

F. Consensusbased

standards 

updated by 

Dec 2015

G. Consensus-based standards 

updated as necessary

Regulations 

& Guidance

Metrics

A. Agreements 

among the 

FAA, DoD, 

DHS, NASA, 

NOAA, DOJ 

and other 

public 

entities 

finalized and 

signed in 

conjunction 

with the 

release of the 

sUAS NPRM 

by Dec 2012

E. 14CFR107 

published by 

August 2014

F. 14CFR107 

and/or 

guidance 

material 

updated by 

Dec 2015 

G. 14CFR107 updated as necessary

Product

Metrics

B. sUAS night

operations

experiments 

and final

report 

completed 

by Sep 2012

C. If night 

operations 

are deemed 

as safe or 

safer by the 

FAA, 

increased 

night 

operations

for public 

entities are 

allowed by 

Dec 2012

E. FAA 

process for 

issuing 

permits to 

operate is 

functional by 

August 2014 

F. FAA 

process for 

issuing 

permits to 

operate 

updated by 

Dec 2015

G. FAA process for issuing permits 

to operate updated as necessary
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

50

7.7 Test Ranges Goals and Metrics Summary

Time 

Frame

Near Term Mid Term Far Term

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016-2020 2020+

Goals and 

Metrics

1. FAA program

to integrate 

UAS into 

NAS at six 

test ranges

established 

by Aug 2012

2. Test ranges

selected by 

FAA by

Dec 2012

3.Selected test 

ranges 

operational 

by Jun 2013

4. Test range program operational until Feb 2017, 

unless extended
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

51

7.8 Miscellaneous Goals and Metrics Summary

Time Frame

Near Term Mid Term Far Term

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016-2020 2020+

Goals

1. Update the FAA UAS Integration Roadmap annually through 2015

2. Develop a 

comprehensive 

plan by 2013 for 

safely integrating 

UAS operations in 

the NAS by 2015

3. Identify air traffic 

management 

system changes 

required to be 

implemented in 

NextGen

4. Develop UAS 

operational

scenarios

Product

Metrics

A. Updated FAA 

UAS Integration 

Roadmap 

published annually

B. 2006 Airspace 

Integration Plan 

reviewed and 

update by the 

FAA’s UAS ARC 

by Nov 2012

C. UAS ARC 

recommendations 

for changes to 

FAA, DoD, DHS, 

NASA and 

industry programs 

are provided to the 

FAA by Dec 2012

D. UAS are addressed 

in the FAA’s 2012 

NextGen 

Implementation 

Plan by Dec 2012

E. UAS are addressed 

in FAA’s NextGen 

Enterprise 

Architecture by 

Dec 2012

A. Updated FAA UAS Integration Roadmap 

published annually
Working DRAFT – all revisions – v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

52

7.8 Miscellaneous Goals and Metrics Summary

Time Frame

Near Term Mid Term Far Term

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016-2020 2020+

F. RTCA and FAAdefined operational 

scenarios are 

provided to the 

UAS ARC by 

Aug 2012 

G. UAS ARC 

completes its 

review of draft 

UAS operational 

scenarios, and 

provides its 

comments to the 

FAA by Sep 2012