The ANSP perspective

Fiesole – 5/10/2015 Maurizio Mancini

Past = One Man Show

Today = An hard work

Who manage Air Tfc in airspace?

The ANSP

What’s an ANSP?Any public or private entity providing ANS for general air traffic, including an organisationhaving applied for a certificate to provide such services. (Reg. EU 1035/2011).

What are ANS?

ATS, CNS, MET, AIS

What a flight means for an ANSP

VFR IFR

???

Airspace Classification & Rules

???

So far, ANSPs knows that the pilot is directly responsible

How is it going?• “An Airbus A320's wing passed 6m (20ft) below a drone hovering at

Heathrow, said the Civil Aviation Authority” (http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-33612631)

• “Six "near misses" between drones and piloted aircraft have been recorded by the CAA” (http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-33612631)

• “Lufthansa plane in near miss with drone on Warsaw approach, the crew of the Lufthansa Embraer ERJ-195 reported the near collision with the drone at 2,500ft (760m) (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-33605869),

• “There have been more than 20 reported incidents involving unmanned aircraft, or drones, since April last year in Singapore” (http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/more-than-20-incidents/1839976.html)

• In US near misses in many international airports (New York La Guardia, Los Angeles International, ecc..)(http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2014/06/23/close-encounters-with-small-drones-on-rise/)

Which is the ENAV’s role/liability, NOW?

C) AIR TRAFFIC SERVICES ARE NOT PROVIDED TO CIVIL RPA

D) INFORMATION REGARDING CIVIL RPA OPERATIONS AT OR BELOW 500FT AGL, OUTSIDE ATZ, IS NOT AVAILABLE TO ATS UNITS

E) FROM SFC TO 500FT AGL, OUTSIDE ATZ, SEPARATION, TRAFFIC AVOIDANCE ADVICE, TRAFFIC INFORMATION AND FLIGHT INFORMATION SERVICE ARE NOT PROVIDED TO MANNED AIRCRAFT IN RESPECT OF CIVIL RPA

F) CIVIL RPA OPERATORS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR SEPARATION FROM ANY OTHER AIRCRAFT AND SHALL GIVE RIGHT OF WAY AND LAND, OR DESCEND BELOW 25M AGL, IN ORDER TO AVOID INTERFERENCE WITH OTHER AIRCRAFT

ANSPs current experience on UAS/RPAS Operations

• ANSPs in some States have safely and successfully integrated RPAS operations outside segregated airspace.

• This has been achieved on a case by case basis and universally applicable procedures have not yet been developed.

• Experience shows that safe integration has been possible, but current RPAS do not have the capability to operate seamlessly with other air traffic.

The EASA UAS/RPAS proposed classification/approach

The EASA UAS/RPAS classification/approach

Future = Still unknown but shall be safer

Future = Still unknown but shall be safer

Integrated system

Procedure

Rules

Training

Common sense

Safe

tyM

itig

atio

ns

Number of drones Number of drones

$

Future = Still unknown but shall be safer

Drones or not Drones?

... or, alternatively, the question will soon become: “How we should integrate the airlines operations in an airspace/world dominated by the drones?”

Are we going to answer to the question: “How we shall integrate drones operations in the airlines airspace/world?”

Who can assure an acceptable level of safety?

The new drone swatter

OR

ANSPs approach on UAS/RPAS IntegrationIn general, to properly manage this issue ANSPs see two main distinguished (although not black and white) streams/areas for UAS/RPAS integration:

• The so-called “Integration of UAS/RPAS in ATM”, i.e. in “CONTROLLED/NON-SEGREGATED AIRSPACE”:• This theme is addressed by the European ATM Master Plan. • R&D related activities are performed under SESAR JU coordination. • Ruling process is on-going at international level.

• The exponential growth of “small drones” (i.e. mainly within EASA “open” and “specific” proposed categories) used for recreational or business purposes. Use is mainly at Very Low Level Operations (VLL) generally taking place in “UNCONTROLLED AIRSPACE”

• The second theme is not yet clearly addressed nor recognised in the European ATM R&D Agenda

ANSPs approach on UAS/RPAS integration

• Much of the small UAS/RPAS operations will be performed in uncontrolled airspace and mostly at VLL (Very Low Level) in the class F and G airspace.

• In class F & G airspace no Air Traffic Control Service is provided and the integration of small UAS/RPAS could potentially cause a degradation of the existing safety level and thus require the definition of innovative enabling infrastructures and services.

ANSPs approach on UAS/RPAS integration• Smart use of existing COM & SUR

technologies (ADS-B Out, Mobile Broadband, Satellite communications etc.) to support innovative cloud-based services allowing a safe management of UAS/RPAS Traffic Management Operations (RITM) in class F and G with respect to current users (e.g. General Aviation etc.).

• Innovative operational services should encompass the use of mission-related segregated areas or corridors (geo-fencing), security aspects in relation with RPAS surveillance, electronic flight plan treatment and broadcasting of safety related information.

A lot of issues but at least a great pro: we are all pilots!

Question?