Uk Regulators Pave Way For Drone Traffic In Shared Skies

The UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) has taken a significant step towards integrating Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) into non-segregated airspace alongside traditional crewed aircraft. The authority’s Technical Concept of Operations outlines the use of Electronic Conspicuity (EC) to address the fundamental limitation of traditional “see-and-avoid” practices, which are generally ineffective for UAS because uncrewed aircraft are typically too small for crewed pilots to visually detect.

One of the key aspects of the CAA’s plan is the distinction between crewed and uncrewed aircraft. Uncrewed UAS operating BVLOS must emit a 978 MHz Universal Access Transceiver (UAT) ADS-B signal, functioning to DO-282B standards, with a Source Integrity Level (SIL) and System Design Assurance (SDA) of at least 1. Additionally, these systems are required to carry “ADS-B IN” receivers capable of detecting both 1090 MHz and 978 MHz signals.

In contrast, crewed aircraft are subject to different requirements based on their speed. Slower aircraft (<140 knots IAS) must broadcast using 1090 MHz ADS-B devices with an SIL and SDA of at least 1. Faster aircraft (>140 knots IAS), on the other hand, must use higher-performance equipment, specifically a Mode S transponder with ADS-B Extended Squitter functionality, operating with an SIL of 3 and an SDA of 2.

However, one crucial aspect of the CAA’s plan is the carriage of “ADS-B IN” equipment—the systems required to actually receive and display the locations of other aircraft, including UAS—will remain an optional, risk-based choice for crewed aircraft operators. This decision has sparked significant objections from various airspace users regarding the integration of UAS and the required EC systems.

The General Aviation (GA) community expressed strong opposition to the equipage rules, arguing that the financial burden of purchasing and installing mandatory EC devices should be borne by the UAS sector, which they view as the primary beneficiary of these airspace integration policies. Many GA respondents argued that the financial cost of implementing these requirements would be prohibitively expensive for small and medium-sized businesses.

Furthermore, some GA pilots who responded to the consultation expressed concerns about the practicality of carrying EC equipment. A significant proportion of respondents (87.9%) who opposed the equipage requirements for slower aircraft were glider, paraglider, hang glider, or paramotor pilots. These pilots argued that carrying EC equipment is impractical and fails to mitigate collision risks, as their unpowered aircraft lack the manoeuvrability required to evade oncoming traffic, including uncrewed systems.

The CAA’s plan also raises concerns about mixed equipage environments, where manned aircraft operating without receivers may have an incomplete picture of the airspace, potentially leading to unpredictable avoidance manoeuvres during close-proximity encounters with UAS. Safety advocates warned that this could lead to a “mixed equipage” environment, where the risk of accidents increases due to the lack of comprehensive data on the airspace.

Some respondents objected to UAS operating on the 978 MHz frequency, arguing it could fragment the current EC environment, which relies largely on 1090 MHz, thus reducing the likelihood of consistent detection. Furthermore, integrating low-power EC signals into existing Traffic Collision Avoidance Systems (TCAS) on crewed aircraft raised concerns about display clutter and excessive alerting, which could distract pilots.

Uncrewed aircraft operators also expressed concerns about privacy and security risks associated with continuously broadcasting their locations. They noted that this requirement could create significant risks for sensitive UAS operations such as the delivery of medical supplies or other critical infrastructure projects.

The integration of EC systems into non-segregated airspace is a critical step towards promoting safe and efficient operations for UAS. However, it also requires careful consideration of various technical, practical, and regulatory issues. The UK CAA’s plan has the potential to promote safe and efficient operations for UAS, but it also raises significant concerns about cost, proportionality, safety, and privacy.

In order to address these concerns, the CAA may need to revisit its Technical Concept of Operations and consider alternative solutions that balance the needs of different airspace users. The authority could explore options for phased implementation, where UAS are gradually introduced into non-segregated airspace alongside traditional crewed aircraft. Alternatively, the CAA could consider providing financial support or subsidies to UAS operators to help them implement EC systems.

Ultimately, the successful integration of EC systems into non-segregated airspace will require a collaborative effort between regulatory authorities, industry stakeholders, and airspace users. By working together, we can promote safe and efficient operations for UAS while minimizing the risks associated with this emerging technology.

Original Source

• Read the full article here