The most expected, the most advanced and most promising UTM/CIS module called ACM, has finally reach production level.
What problem did we solve?
By digitising airspace and introducing most of the U-space services (U1-U3), we have opened the gates to legal flying for all interested. It turned out that there are more of them than we assumed. We mean more people in such a short period. And, paradoxically, it turned out that the accelerated digitalised processes but still with manual handling require considerable personal involvement. We have launched a module thanks to which, under certain conditions, acceptance of flight plans and permission for take-off in controlled airspaces are issued automatically.
What conditions must be met to obtain permission to fly?
There are plenty of them, for example, experience of UAV operator, forecasted aeronautical situation (the number of manned and unmanned aircraft) in the selected volume of airspace in time, declared/required height of the flight, approach used for manned aviation, which is a derivative of wind direction and many other.
How flexible is automation management?
And here lies the greatness of this solution. Each TWR supervisor, for each CTR nook, can set and adjust the conditions for issuing flight consents. Also, depending on the time of day, place and altitude, the content of the automatically issued flight conditions (sometimes, flight conditions resulting from SORA, are exceeding A4 page) can be customised. You can also group spaces to manage their automated processes in an organised manner. In a word, there are many management options, but the most important is the fact that you can interrupt this process in any and transparent way for safety reasons.
Does ACM require a special division of controlled spaces?
This is recommended. At PansaUTM, we've divided CTRs into RPA (Remotely Piloted Airspace), in accordance with airspace assessment. As a result, we have airspaces in which:
- automatic consents are issued on certain terms (green or blue RPA), - in which automatic consents are issued with restrictions and on condition (e.g. Approach with circling) - red (e.g. <1km from the airport), where consents require manual coordination.
Who decides that the selected operator or company has the right to use automated processes?
U-space supervisor, has the right to grant permissions for individual users and / or companies. Due to the fact that the automatic consent process is issued automatically, the list of privileged users will be subject to constant audits.
Does ACM also support priority missions?
We have introduced to the PansaUTM the possibility of granting SuperPilot and 112 type of priority permissions. SuperPilot is known to the authority (ANSP, CAA, Local Administration Unit) user or company (sometimes we call them Frequent Flyers). The 112 user is only dedicated to special priority users, like Police, Firefighting, Hospitals, etc. Those users, has the right at the stage of submitting a mission (dFPL) to set prioritized mission. The relevant information is than displayed on the AMC (Airspace Management Cell) as well as at the ATC workplace. If, for some reason, the mission could not be issued automatically, the system will in priority mode inform the ACM for immediate action to issue expected flight approvals and inform all involved stakeholders.
Those RPA's will be in near future enriched by the X,Y,Z classification.
How long is this road to full automation or even more precious full autonomy?
Still, long, but we are closer. No matter how quickly we want to achieve the goal of full automation, we must provide ourselves with a magic red button, by some called the "Contingency button" which at absolutely every stage of the U-space process will give us the opportunity to act. Those, identified stages are for example: risk analysis, submission and acceptance of the flight plan, issuing flight conditions, permission for take-off. There are many of them.
We will be soon publishing more about the automated ACM processes together with demonstration videos. Stay tuned.