## UAS ARC Recommended Changes

– 8/ 7 /12

Integration of Civil Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) into the National Airspace System (NAS)

Roadmap BasisWorking 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 Fu ture Civil U ses 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, Flightc rew Member, and Air Traffic Co ntroller)

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, Flightc rew Member, and Air Traffic Controller)

4.7 R&D / Technology

5 Perspective 3: E volution

5.1 Overview

5.2 Standards

5.3 Rules and Regulations

5.4 Certification of the UAS

5.5 Procedures and AirspaceWorking DRAFT

– v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

iii 5.6 Training ( Pilot, Flightc rew 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 S mall UAS (sUAS) Rules

7.7 Test Ranges

7.8 Miscellaneous

A Acronym s

B Glossary

C Goals and Metrics SummaryWorking DRAFT

– v10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

iv 

### Executive Summary Expanding O perations of Unmanned Aircraft Systems in the NAS

Since the early 1990s, Unmanned Aircraft System s (UAS) have operated on a limited basis in the National Airspace System (NAS). U ntil recently, unmanned aircraft mainly supported public operations, such as military and border security operations

, with th e list of potential uses rapidly expanding to include a broad range of other activities including : aerial photography, surveying

la nd 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 efficienc y , decrease costs

, and enhance safety

.

As stated in Destination 2025 ( 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 comp lexity 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 integrat ion of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) safely and efficiently into the NAS. Toward that goal, t he

FAA is collaborat ing with a broad spectrum of stakeholders, which include s manufacturers, commercial vendors, industry trade associations, technical standards organizations, academic

institutions , research and developm ent centers, governmental agencies and other regulators

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

, decreasing safe ty or placing other airspace users or persons and property on the ground at

increased risk

. Gre at progress has been made

, but significant barriers remain

.

A main objective of the FAA is to develop a sound techn ical, regulatory and policy bas i s for

UAS to operate safely and efficiently in the NAS

. Today, u nmanned aircraft are typically given

acces s to airspace thr ough the issu ance of Certificates of Waiver or Autho rization ( COA s ) to public operators and Special Airworthiness Certificate s

– Experimental Category (SAC

- EC s ) to

civil applicant s. While

, t he FAA has a proven certificat ion process in pla ce 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 a ircraft

.

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 ac cess 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

th i s emerging technolog y to achieve its full potential safely

.Working DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 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. T he UAS community

is finding it difficult t o 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 r oadmap is to outline, within a broa d timeline, the tasks and considerations needed to enable UAS integration into the NAS for the planning purposes of the broader UAS community.

T he r oadmap is intended to guide aviation stakeholders in under standing operational goals and challenge s when c onsidering 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

sp ecific 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.

R oadmap timeframes a re 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 mid

term, and greater than 10 years as the long

- term. For this r oadmap, the long

- term is defined as

202 2

- 202 6 , 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) I ntegrated 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 s ystems, 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 cont rol (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 F AA and its predecessor agenc ies 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 increas i ng dramatically

, highli gh ting the need for a structured approach for safe and efficient integration.

1.2 Future Civil Uses

The use of UAS in c ommercial applications is expected to expand in a number of areas ( “Operational Services and Environment Definit ion (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

– v 10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

2 • S ecurity 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 pe rson responsible for dutie s 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. C ontrol Station

3. Data Link

Figure 1: The UAS and Flightc rew Members

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

– air navigation facilities, equipment and services, airports or landing areas; aeronautical char t s, in formation and services; rules, regulations and procedures, technical information; and manpower and material. ( see Figure 2)Working DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 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 sat ellite

- 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 pol icy 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 accordan ce with required procedures and practices. This same policy applies to UAS.

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

e quipment, p ersonnel, and o perations & p rocedures. Each of these areas has standards and

m inimum levels of safet y that must be met independent of each other . As a matter of policy, for example, a new aircraft must be able to independently obtain a n airworthiness certificate regardless of the airspace class where it might be flown. However, as a result or part of this certification, new procedure s may be required for flight crew members and ATC in order to maintain the minimum level of safety of the NAS while accommodating the new technology.

Under s pecial certifications and authorizations, lim ited operations may be authorized for equipment unable to meet current standards.Working DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

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

the FAA Notice of Policy: Unmanned Aircraft Operations in the National Airs pace System (F ederal 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 requ ired 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 qualificatio n 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 pos sess 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 add ressing 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 comparab le to that of manned operations

. Current ICAO guidance material for UAS is published in Circular 328, which provide s basic guidelines for member States to introduce and integrate UAS into airspace in a co nsistent manner globally . The document’s guiding policy towards UAS is:

A number of Civil Aviation Autho rities (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 safel y 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

mus t be able to comply with existing provisions to the greatest extent possible. (ICAO Circular 328, AN/190 unmanne d aircraft systems, 2011 )

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

national civil aviation a uthorities 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

– v 10 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 th at develops consensus

- based recommendations regarding communications, navigation, surveillance, and air traffic
management system issues. The FAA considers RTCA recommendations when making policy, program, and re gulatory decisions. The RTCA Special Commi ttee 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 a re 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

• U AS will have access to the NAS , provided the y 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 instru ctions, 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 continue s

to collaborate with government and industry stakeholders for recommendations regarding the path to ward integration of UAS into the NAS. This effort will harmonize with the work being done by inte rnational organizations working toward a univ ersal goal of safe and efficient UAS airspace operations.Working DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

6 

### 2 UAS Operations in NAS

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

communit y 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 m ain 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 th e 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 , AJV

13, which considers operational authorization s for UAS flight that are unab le 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 an d 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 issue s that impact the integration of UAS into the NAS are being considered across the regul atory 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 outline d in the following sub

- sections.

2.2.1 Policy, Guida nce, 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 create d. 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 relat es to certification of

airmen and the unmanned aircraft system that will require research

.Working DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

7 Figure 3 : AVS Products Needed to Regulate

The c hallenge is to identify and develop the regulatory structure for UAS that encompass es areas listed in F igure 3

. Fo r 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 requ irements for specified airspace

• Understand the security and environme ntal 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 operation s in the NAS . The ATO UAS Group coordinates the efforts to complete these tasks

.Working DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 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 ch allenges in the areas outlined in F igure 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 inabili ty of UAS to comply directly with ATC visual clearances)

• Establish ing procedures and techniques for safe and secure exchange of voice and data communication between UAS pilots, air traffic controllers, and other NAS users

• Establish ing wake vortex and turbu lence 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. C urrent civil airworthiness regulations may not consider many of t he 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. T here 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 t o 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 longe r durations . Similarly, the issue ofWorking DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

9 performance gap between the pilot and the avionics will impact NAS operation s. One example might be the lack of a quantitative time standard for a pilot response to ATC directions (such as “turn left heading 270, main tain FL250”) does not exist

– there is a n acceptable delay for the pilot’s verbal response and physical action, but there is no doc umented required range of acceptable value s

. Avionics that perform the corresponding function can not be designed and

built w ithout 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 fo llowing 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 alte rnate 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 requir e manual placement and removal from runway, lead vehicle for taxi operations or dedicated launch and recovery systems

Therefore, it is necessary t o develop operational con cepts

, formulate standards

, and promote technological development that will enable manned and unmanned aircraft to operate cohesively in the same airspace. Specific technology challenges include t wo critical functional areas:

• “Sense and Avoid” (SAA) capa bility 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 m ethod 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 avoida nce capability for UAS

. Interoperability cons traints 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 withWorking DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

10 other modes of separat ion 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, W orking G roup

- 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 performanc e of third parties

. The use of third part ies 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 man ned aircraft.

0 100

NearTerm MidTerm FarTermPercent 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

r oadmap addresses the efforts needed to move forward incrementally toward the g oal of full

NAS i ntegration.

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

ahead. These perspectives transcend the timelines of near, mid and far term and provide additional insight in to the task of integ rating UAS into the NAS:Working DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 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. Accommoda tion will predominate in the near term , and w hile 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

, validat e advanced mitigation strategies

, and explore opportunities to progress UAS integration in to the NAS.

Perspective 2 : Integration

. Establishing threshold performance requirements for

UA S that would increas e access to the NAS , is a primary objective of int egration

. During th e mid

- far time period s , 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

o f 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 routin ely updated to support UAS operations in the N AS 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 th e 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 in ter

- dependent.

1. Standards

2. Rules and Regulations

3. Certification of the UAS

4. Procedures and Airspace

5. Training (Pilot

, Flightc rew Member, and Controller)

6. R&D and Technology

The r oadmap discusses the activities and transitions for the se topic areas from the va ntage of the three perspectives.Working DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 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 safe l y allowing for the expanded operation of UAS through accommodation

. Over time , increased access to the NAS through accommodation will be po ssible 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 vo lume 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

T here has been a growing interest in a wide variety of ci vil uses for unmanned aircraft. There

are a number of airworthiness paths that can be applied for airworthiness certification of UAS. Of the various methods, o ne method that the UAS civil communit y 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 o n a case

- by

- c ase basi s that allow s a carefully

- def ined 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 simil ar to the use for manned aircraft.

To date

, the FAA has issued over 9 0 experimental certificates to 13 civil operators utilizing 20 unique UAS designs, including 6 certificates for Optionally Piloted Aircraft (OPA). These experimental certificates have b een useful for UAS research and development (R&D) , and a s 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 certificatio n

. The FAA is work ing with the ARC to gain feedback to potential changes to airworthiness standards for UAS if necessary. I n 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 cer tificated

aircraft

.

3.2 Standards

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

standards. R equirements 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, metho ds, processes and practices. A standard may be deve loped 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 hav e more diverse input and usua lly develop voluntary standards which may be adopted by the FAA as a means of compliance

.Working DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 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 C FR) 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 on board 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 consideration s as manned aircr aft, 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 comp onents 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 s everal standard s development organizations

. Most of these organizations plan to complete their UAS standards development efforts in the near

- to

- mid

- term timeframe

. When accepted, t hese standards development products will provide a means of complian ce for rules established in the mid

- term.
The FAA has also been either the lead ( or an importa nt participant ) in c ross

- agency efforts that

influence standards development and has coordinated and harmonized these activities with

international efforts.

Sta ndardization 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 posit ion papers

• SC

- 203’s O perational S ervices and E nvironment D efinition For Unmanned Aircraft Systems (OSED, DO

- 320) which documented definitions and operating scenarios for different UAS operat ions in the NAS

• RTCA Air Traffic Management Advisory Committee, R equirements and Planning Work Group Report “Airspace Considerations for UAS Integration in the National A irspace System,” March 26, 2008

• SAA Workshop Report s which have documented SAA tim e lines and definitions

S tandards 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

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

Circulars . The MPS may be used to defi ne Technical Standard Orders ( TSOs ) in the mid

- to

long

- term

.

Additional coordination and input from the stakeholder community (industry and trade associations, manufacturers

, academia and research organizations, and publi c agencies) is being provided with the recent establishment of the FAA

- UAS ARC

.Working DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

14 Although the need to develop standards can not 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 Rule s and Regulations Unmanned aircraft operations have significantly increased in number, technical complexity and sophistication during recent years without speci fic regulations to address their unique characteristics. For a person wishing to design, manufacture, market or operate a n 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

accom modation 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

. T he 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

revie w , a determination will be made regarding the need to modif y, 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 c ertification is a p rocess 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 def ined 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 proced ures for UAS.

T he FAA believes that the UAS community will be best served by their use of a n incrementa l 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 metric s

.Working DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 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 Sys tem (NAS)”

, March 28, 2011), defines how UAS are permitted to operate in the NAS today :

• COA s : for Public access to the NAS

– i nterim regulatory gui dance is being updated and

will be releas ed as a Notice

• SAC

- EC: for civil access to the NAS

• AC 91

- 57 : for Mo delers (recreation) access to the NAS (June 1981)

SAC

- EC and COAs will always be viable method s for access ing the NAS

, but typically come

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

the UAS certificat ion 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 no t RVSM capable; and they do not fly traditional trajectory

- based flight paths and require non

- traditional handling in emergency

situationsWorking DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 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 p rocedures

• 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 window s, 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 aviatio n system , and the FAA fully supports th is and is a lea der 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, Flightc rew 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, requi red

crew member s (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, pr ocedures, 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 re solved (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 area s 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 duplicat ive and make the

best use of limited resources. Additionally, t h e FAA UAS R&D plan is considered with in the

JPDO R D &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. T he Technical Community Representative Group (TCRG) is sponsor ing br oad

- based UAS research (SAA, C2, and control

station studies) aimed at integration with NextGen and validation of concepts. N ear

- term expected progress is described here :

Sense and Avoid:Working DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

17 Significant research into SAA methods is underway by both governme nt 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 mu lti

- sensor use and other technolog ies

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

.

S ome public agencies and commercial companies are seeking to develop advanced mitigations

, such as Ground Based Sense and Avoid (GBSAA) systems

, as a strategy for inc reased 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 devel op 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 t o being used as an advanced accommodation tool. See Section 7. 3 for specific goals and metrics

Research is underway on Airborne SAA (ABSAA) concepts . D ue to complexity, significan t 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 st andardized SAA system is a long

- term o bjective

. See Section s 7. 4 for specific goals and metrics

Control and Communications: A primary goal of C2 research is the develop ment of a n appropriate C2 link between the

unmanned aircraft and the c ontrol s tation 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 l atency, a vailability, i ntegrity, c ont inuity and other performance measures

.

UAS contingency and emergency scenarios also require research (e.g. how will a UAS in the NAS respond when the co mmand link is lost either through equipment malfunction or malicious jamming

, etc. ) . Th is research wil l drive standards that are being established :

• Development and validation of U AS control link prototype

• Vulnerability analysis of UAS safet y critical communications

• Completion of large

- scale simulations and flight testing of initial performance requirement s

Spectrum and civil radio frequency (RF) allocation are issue s 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 metricsWorking DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 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:

• Valid ate current mitigation proposals

• Establish a baseline of end

- to

- end UAS performance measures

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

• D evelop NextGen concepts, including 4

- dimensional trajectory u tilizing 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, d ata will be collected t o 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 responsibilitie s 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; an d 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 com munication; 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/A TC skill set, training, certification, and currency)

Other research in this phase includes activities to support safety case validation and the associated mitigations. This includes c ase

- by

- case assessment s to determine the likelihood that a system/opera tion 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

• In ability to safeguard the publicWorking DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

19 Summary of “Accommodation” Priorities

A ccommodation 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

— c ollect /a nalyze operational and safety d ata Robust research, modeling, and simulation for UAS S ense 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 Aut horization 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 an d 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

– v 10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

20 

### 4 P erspective 2 : Integration

4.1 Overview

In the mid

- term

, emphasis will shift significantly from accommodation to integration

. For the

residual accommodati on 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 avenue s for accessing the NAS, but emphasis will shift

toward integration of UAS through the implemen ta t i on of civil standards for unmanned aircraft pilot s and UAS certification, together with necessary policy guidance and operational procedures.

Integration efforts will focus on sequentially developing and implementing the UAS system require ments established by the FAA :

• Finalize the integrated set of F AA 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 operat e 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/ expande d 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.

Integ ration 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 e nable manned and unmanned aircraft to fly together in an environment that me ets 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 operation s 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 exis ting 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 M ASPS 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 M O PS mayWorking DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 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, t he FAA is proposing to amend its regulations to adopt specific rules for the operation of s mall unmanned

aircraft s ystems (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 ex perience 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 sUA S 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

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

certification and requirements.

Once adopted, the proposed regulation w ill alleviate the need for sUAS operators to conduct operations under either a COA or a n 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 defin ing a n 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

a pproved 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 wi th associated ATC procedures for airport

conditionsWorking DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

22 4.6 Training ( Pilot, Flightc rew Member, and Air Traffic Controller) The FAA’s role in training is to establish policy, guidance and standards. Flight instructor, p ilot

, and crew member training standar ds are under development. The se standards wil l 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 pr ovide practical test oversight

• Designat ion of Pilot E xaminers (DPE) to assist the FSDO s

• Development of a UAS hand book 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 pe rmit 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 regime ns 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, includin g UAS performance,

behav ior , communication s
, 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 sp ecific 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 requi red. 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 intrudersWorking DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 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 e valuation of risk

- based SS algorithms and policy issues

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

f light demonstration of SA algorithms, with criteria

- based sep aration

Although research will continue , fully certified UA

- based c ollision 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 effici ent 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 m anagement, spectrum analysis, and frequency
management

. E fforts 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 W orld R adio Telecommunication C onference

• Verif ication and validat ion of control communication final performance requirements

• Establish ment of UAS c ontrol link nationa l/international standards

• Develop ment and validati on of technologies to mitigate vulnerabilities

Complete characterization of the capacity and performance impact of UAS on ATC communication systems will be c ompleted

. See Section 7. 5 for specific goals and metrics.

Human Factors:

Human Factors research will continue in the areas of hu man

- machine interface (both control

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

c ollected in the near

- ter m 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 auto mation must be

identified.

Summary of “ Integration ” Priorities “Equivalent visual” flight operations standards defined

Public Issuance of sUAS rule

C2 link standards d efined 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 t raining and certification standard sWorking DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 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:

• P olicy, operational guidance, and standards for civil aircraft airworthiness and NAS operations

• Continued airworthiness methodologies

• Training and certification standardization

• Certif ication 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 activitie s 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, Flightc rew Member, and Air Traffic Controller )Working DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 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 F light 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 stand ards established by the FAA. Planned activities include:

• Sense and Avoid research that focus es on algorithm development and compatibility with

current and future manned aircraft collision avoidance systems such as TCAS and ADS

B, as well as compatibilit y 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 environme nt

• Research on new tools and techniques to support avionics and control software development and certification, to ensure their safety and reliability

.

Organized studies will con tinue to investigate the evolution of UAS operations in to the NextGen

enviro nment. Detailed r esearch 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 air craft. This c apability

would rel y 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

. Th is 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 certifi ed UAS and crew members in the evolving NAS Published FAA TSOs based on system level MOPS

Certified Sense and Avoid algo rithm for collision avoidanceWorking DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 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 ch allenge. T he 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 uti l i ze 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, th is r oadmap has focus ed on the activities required to achieve full integration of UAS into the evol ving 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 time ly 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

stan dards, 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 accomplishe d. Because unmanned aircraft are considered aircraft that are flown by pilots , existing regulations and procedures are largely applicable. However, t he 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 co st

- effective development

. The FAA is not bound by international policies and standar d

s. However,

h armonizing efforts with the int ernational 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 ti me 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

– v 10 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 w ill allow increased UAS access to the NAS and the initial opportunity for commercial operations. In the l ong term, t he principle objective of the aviation regulatory framework is to achieve and maintain the highest possible uniform level of safety while m aintaining 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 U AS

into non

- segregated airspace

. Research will be focused in the areas of sense and av oid,

control and communications , and human factors.Working DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 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 add ressed concurrently. For each goal, a set of metrics (i.e., well

- define d milestones with target completion dates) are defined. The metrics help establish and maintain common government and industry expectations, and enable objective assessments of the pr ogress 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 road map 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 b e 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 addre ss 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 t he 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 sho uld 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 ot her “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 Certifi cate.Working DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

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

2012.

A. FAA ’s UAS classification strategy finalized and communicated by Dec 20 12

.

o Explanation. A baseline classification is a required first s tep in developing regulations or consensus standards.

B. FAA’s draft basis of certification established by Dec 20 12

.

o Explanation. This will most likely be modification s to existing requirements

and/or consensus

- based standards established for manned ai rcraft

.

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 regulation s to establish a

basis for modif ying existing rules or establishing new rules specific to UAS. This will act as a catalyst to establish th e process to be used for UAS certification

. It has the potential to significantly reduce the time/effort required by fu ture UAS certification applicants.

Goal 2: FAA’s d raft 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.

R equirements can be identified and refined as a result of previous Pathfinder efforts, publication of ASTM consensus standards, and related ongoing ef forts 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 e xplanation above for P athfinder programs

.

F. Other UAS certification programs defined by Dec 2013.

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

establishment of S mall 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, e tc

. 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 s UAS Rule publication will provide the necessary data to fi nalizeWorking DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 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 Pathfind er programs.

I. Pathfinder certification programs completed by Dec 2015.

o Explanation. It is expect ed that some certification s 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 s UAS Rule will provide the necessary data to finalize certification requirements. It is expect ed that some system certification s 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 (includ ing medical requirements , trai ning 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

s UAS 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 th em

now.

B. Draft requirements developed by Dec 2013.

o Explanation. Adaptation of existing regulations regarding record keeping, logging of flight time, recen t experience, etc

. found in CFR 14 Parts 61, 91, 141,

and 142 provide a ready baseline to establ ish requirements.Working DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

31 C. FAA publish es 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

- ex planatory.

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 site s 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 prov ide 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 Do D 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 l imited civil applications granted by Jan 2014.

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

GBSAA test site s and operational approvals for use of GBSAA for educational and other public applications , expanded approvals are e xpected to be granted for

limited civil use at select locations.

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

o Explanation. Assimilate prior deployment experience for DoD, public, and limited civil use, a nd develop MASPS for GBSAA.

E. FAA approvals for use of GBSAA for civil applications granted by Dec 2014.Working DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

32 o Explanation. Self

- explanatory.

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

o Explanation. Self

- exp lanatory.

G. GBSAA certification standards updated as necessary.

o Explanation. Self

- explanatory.

7.4 Airborne

- Based Sense and Avoid (ABSAA)

Goal 1: Initial FAA certif ication of AB SAA that facilitate s UAS operations without the requirement for a vis ual 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 wil l 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

in itial, 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 co nsiderations 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 requ irements) for manned aircraft operating simultaneously in the same airspace.

Goal 2: Installation and certificati on of AB SAA for use by DoD , other public, and civil entities that provide the SAA functions required in the NAS for Classes A, E, and G a ir space
, 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

requ irements, 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

– v 10 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 release d by Jun 201 4

.

o Explanation. This document includes the requirements basis to develop Minimum Operational Perfo rmance Standards (MOPS) for SAA subsystems, including the SAA avionics onboard the unmanned aircraft and required elements of ground control sys tems.

F. RTCA SAA MOPS released by Dec 2015

.

o Explanation. This document include s the avionics onboard the UAS and required elements of ground control systems.

G. FAA SAA TSO issued by 2016.

o Explanation. This document include s 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 c ertification of initial ABSAA systems that enable the DoD and other publ ic 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 add ress the requirements for ABSAA system(s), including ADS

- B, TCAS and non

- cooperative sensing. (“System” includes both hardware and software.)

J. FAA “Issue P aper (s)” on UAS SAA implementation in one or more programs for UAS operations in all NAS airspac e 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 p rovide the SAA functions that facilitate integrated operation of manned and unmanned aircraft in all NAS airspace classes by 2020.Working DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

34 K. I nitial RTCA UAS MASPS released by 2016.

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

- to

- end

c ivil 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 aircraf t and required elements of ground control systems.

M. RTCA SAA MOPS f or 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 SA A 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. RTC A 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 ra dio 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 intera ct with air traffic controllers and pilots of nearby aircraft, both manned and unmanned.

A. I nternational agreement was reached in Feb 2012 at the International Telecommunications Union’s (ITU) World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC) on spectrum alloca tions

for radio line

- of

- sight (LOS) UAS C2 links (or in ITU terminology, Control and Non

Payload Communications [CNPC] links).Working DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 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 f rom 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 ar e 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 Minimu m 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 system s 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 develope d, 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 pre

flight, 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

a ircraft, 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 el ements 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

– v 10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

36 F. I nternational a greement 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 Non

Payload Communications [CNPC] links) by Dec 2015

.

o Explanation. Internationally harmonized radio spectr um 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 operat ion 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 en abling 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 Ex planation. 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. I nitial 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 ma nufacturers to incorporate in their UASs, and for operators to obtain FAA approval for their UAS operations.

Goal 2: B eyond

- line

- of

- sight (BLOS) C2 links and capabilities are addressed in the international agreements, industry standards, and FAA regulatio ns and guidance material.

J. RTCA ’s MOPS for all the UAS subsystems involved in providing or enabling beyond

line

- of

- sight (BLOS) C2 capabilities for civil UAS published

. Initial publication is in 2016 and final publication is in 2017. These elements i nclude 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 addre ss BLOS C2 capabilities for civil UAS.

o Explanation. Self

- explanatory.Working DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 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 bo th radio line

- of

- sight and beyond

line

- of

- sight C2 links to meet the current and projected demand generated by civil UAS operations in the NAS.

M. I nternational spectrum allocations for both LOS and BLOS UAS C2 links are reviewed

at the WRC 2020 and revi sed 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 s UAS p roposed r ule has undergone a risk assessment b y 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

oppor tunity 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 op eration s 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 considerati on 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. P ublic 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

. W hen completed

, these standards will provide meaningful guidance toWorking DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

38 manufacturers and e nd 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 deploym ent 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

. W ithout these draft standards being available, it will be difficult to p rovide meaningful and constructive

comments.

Goal 2: sUAS rule adoption for public and civil operations.

E. 14CFR107 p ublished, 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

- based standards and

it must have in place a process to issue permits to operate.

F. Update s UAS rules , guidance, and/or consensus

- based standards after sufficient data have been gathered and analyzed by Dec 20 15

.

o Explanation. Assuming a final rule implementation s
, the FAA will have over 1 .5

year s of data for sUAS operating under 14 CFR107. 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 s afety 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 Ex planation. 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, Industr y 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

– v 10 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 A ct 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 F eb 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: Upda te 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 cu rrent 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 identi fy 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 effor t are identified, the ARC will provide recommendations for addressing them.

C. UAS ARC r ecommendations for changes to FAA, DoD, DHS, NASA , and industry

programs are provided to the FAA by Dec 20 12

.

o Explanation. Once the UAS ARC has completed its revie w 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

– v 10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

40 Goal 3: Ident ify 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 t he 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 ar e 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 Enterpr ise 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 incorporate d 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 neede d 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 co ntingency 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 revie w 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

– v 10 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+

**Goal s**  1. FAA’s

c lassification and draft basis of certification

established for all types of UAS 2. FAA’s d raft certification requirements
are availabl e 3. FAA’s m inimum certification requirements established 4. FAA c ertification 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 d raft

basis of

certification established by

Dec 2012 D. FAA’s i nitial

certification requirements

defined for

UAS ground station, airframe, control system, propul sion
system, ground
support equipment ( GSE ) , etc. by

Dec 2013 G. FAA’s

minimum

certificati on requirements

for UAS ground station, airframe,

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

. C ertification requirements updated as necessary

Product
Metrics C. Pathfinder

certification

programs defined through
government

ind ustry 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 b y Dec 2015

J. Other

certification

programs completed by

Dec 2015 L. UAS certified as necessaryWorking DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 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+

**Goal s**  1. Pilot and crew member FAA certification requirements for pilots and crews for all UAS classes (includ ing medical requirements, training standards, etc.) published by 2013 and updated as necessary

2. Necessary changes to record keeping systems es tablished Regulations
& Guidance
Metrics A

. FAA

decision to develop draft requirements

itself [Decision made.] B . Draft requirements developed by

Dec 201 3 C. FAA publishes

final requirements by Jun 201 4

E. Changes to

FAA and industry

record keeping

sy stems completed by

Dec 201 4 D. Requirements updated as necessaryWorking DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 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+

**Goal s**  1. GBSAA operations fully approve d 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 i nitial

GBSAA

ce rtification

standards for

civil operations

established by Jan 2014

F. F AA’s f inal

GBSAA

certification

standards for

civil operations

established by Dec 2014 G

. GBSAA certification standards updated as necessary

Regulations
& Guidance
Metrics A. FAA

a pp roval s for

use of

GBSAA at all

DoD GBSAA

test sites granted by

Dec 2012 B. FAA

a pproval s for

use of GBSAA

for educational

and other public applications granted by

Dec 2013 C. FAA

a pproval s for

use of

GBSAA for

limited civil applications granted by

Jan 201 4

E. FAA

a pprova ls for

use of

GBSAA for

civil applications granted by

Dec 2014Working DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

44 7. 4 A irborne

- 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 c ertification of ABSAA that facilitate s UAS operations without the requirement for a visual

observer by 2014

Regulations
& Guidance
Metrics A. Initial proposal for

SAA implemen

tation, integration, and operation in an industry

Pathfinder

program release d by Apr 201 4

B. FAA “Issue

Paper(s)” on

UAS SAA implemen

tation 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 req uired 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

MASP S Part II (safety and interoperability requirements) released by

Dec 2013 E. RTCA SAA

MASPS released by

Dec 201 4 F. RTCA SAA

MOPS released by Dec 2015

Regulations
& Guidance
Metrics G. FAA SAA

TSO issued by

2016

Product
Metrics H. FAA S AA

TSO’d equipment

used operationally

in 2016Working DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

45 7. 4 A irborne

- 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
ABSAA

equipped UAS

in al NAS airspace classes

without the need for a COA

Regulations
& Guidance
Metrics I. Initial proposal for

ABSAA implement

tation, integration, and operation

in one or more

programs released by

2017

Product
Metrics J. FAA “Issue Paper(s)” on

UAS SAA implement

tation in one

or more

program s for

UAS operations in

all NAS airspace

classes released by

2018Working DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 UAS ARC Recommended Changes

25 October 2011 7 August 2012

46 7. 4 A irborne

- 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

unmann ed 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

up dated 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 beyondWorking DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 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+

**Goal s**  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

spe ctrum 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
al locations 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

n ecessary and possible

Standards
Metrics B. RTCA’s

i nitial MASPS

for the overall

C2 capability

for civil UAS published by

Dec 2012 C. RTCA’s f inal

MASPS for

civil UAS C2 capabilities published by

Jun 2013 D. RTCA’s

i nitial MOPS

for all UAS subsystems

invol ved in

radio line

- of

sight C2 capabilities for

civil UAS published by

Jun 2014 G. RTCA’s f inal

MOPS for all

UAS subsystems

involved in

radio line

- of

sight C2 capabilities for

civil UAS published by

Jun 2015 J. RTCA’s

MOPS for all

UAS subsystems

involved i n BLOS C2 capabilities for

civil UAS published

Initial

– 2016

Final

– 2017Working DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 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

- of

sight C2 capabilities for

civil UAS published by

Dec 2014 H. FAA’s

f inal regulations and guidance

material to
enable production, sale, installation,

and

maintenance of

FAA

- certified systems and

services used in providing

radio line

- of

s ight 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 FAA

certified

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 commerciallyWorking DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 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 20 15 2016

- 2020 2020+

**Goal s**  1. sUAS rule adopt ed for public operations 2. sUAS rule adoption for public and civil operations

Standards
Metrics D. Draft s of all required

consensus standards

necessary for imple

mentation of

14CFR107

available to the public in conjunction

with the

release of

the sUAS

NPRM E. Consensus

based

standards accepted by the FAA by August 2014 F. Consensus

based

standards updated by

Dec 2015 G. Consensus

- based standards updated as necessary

Regulations
& Guidance
Metrics A. Agre ements 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 n ight operations experiment s and final
report completed by Sep 2012

C. If night operations

are deemed

as safe or safer by the FAA,

i ncreased night operations for public

entities are allowed by

Dec 2 012 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 necessaryWorking DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 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+

**Goal s and** 
**Metrics** 1. FAA p rogram 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

r ange s operational by Jun 2013 4. Test range program operational until Feb 2017,

unless extendedWorking DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 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 Integra tion 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

s cenarios

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

industr y 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 annuallyWorking DRAFT

– all revisions

– v 10 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 FAA

defined operational

scenarios ar e 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