NTP OUTCAST - UAS Detect and Avoid a pragmatic approach

1
NTP OUTCAST - UAS Detect and Avoida pragmatic
approach

• Michiel Selier
• selier_at_nlr.nl

2

• Once upon a time
• (30 August 2004)
• In a place, far, far, away...
• (near Kabul, Afghanistan)

3
(No Transcript)
4
(No Transcript)
5
(No Transcript)
6
(No Transcript)
7
(No Transcript)
8
(No Transcript)
9
(No Transcript)
10
(No Transcript)
11
(No Transcript)
12
(No Transcript)
13
(No Transcript)
14
(No Transcript)
15
Presentation Contents

• Introduction Project Description
• Requirements Capture Concept Definition
• Detect and Avoid Requirements
• OUTCAST Concept
• Demonstrator Development
• Human Machine Interface
• System Integration and Certification
• Flight Tests
• Overview
• Active Scenarios for Conflict Assessment
• Analysis of Results
• Detect Track
• Situational Awareness and Conflict Assessment
• Questions

16
OUTCAST Project Description

• Customer
• NLD MoD - DRD
• Objective
• short-term solution for Detect Avoid 2010
• Project Duration
• April 2004 2007
• Phasing
• Requirements Capture
• Demonstrator Development
• Flight Test
• Analysis Report
• Work National, Think Global

17
NTP OUTCAST project descriptionFocus and
Assumptions

• Focus on military UAVs in peacetime missions
• Flight safety more important than mission
• Military UAV ? Operational Air Traffic (OAT)
• However, aim to adhere, as much as practical, to
  GAT
• MALE type unmanned vehicles
• Focus on prevention of mid-air collisions
• No airworthiness issues
• No collisions on the ground or with (obstacles
  on) the ground
• For airspace where (Mode S) transponders are
  mandatory
• No dedicated sensor present to detect
  non-cooperative traffic
• An EO/IR payload assist, when cued by Mode S/ACAS
• Focus on detect and track capability
• Address short-term solutions based on mature
  technology
• Data link, automation are not key issues in
  OUTCAST
• Provide a basic HMI

18
Phase 1 Requirements / Concept definition ICAO
Conflict Management
A Layered Safety Concept
The question is not Can I fly, yes or no?,
but Where do I want to fly, and what do I need
for that? SA Solution Technology Procedures
Training
19
Phase 1 Requirements / Concept definition Top
Level Safety Requirement
Equivalent Level of Safety (ELOS)

• Not well defined in manned aviation!
• What is it?
• How do we achieve it?
• How do we prove it?
• ? Acceptable level of safety

20
Phase 1 Requirements / Concept definition
Initial set of requirements
Manned aviation regulations
UAV (draft) Specs o.a.
2 EUROCONTROL UAV OAT TF 3 NATO FINAS SAA
specs
Numerical Scenario Analysis
21
Phase 1 Requirements / Concept definition
OUTCAST Concept Definition (feasible for 2010)
MALE UAVs safely operating as OAT outside
segregated airspace in 2010 under peacetime
conditions
22
Phase 1 Requirements / Concept definition
Technical Challenge
ground track

• TCAS/Mode S level 2 yields
• Broadcast
• Pressure altitude
• Flight ID / Mode S address
• Measured
• range (accurate)
• bearing (limited accuracy)
• TCAS provides relative position and speed
• sufficient for collision avoidance
• poor for self-separation

Track on TCAS (relative)

• EO/IR Payload may provide
• better bearing
• aircraft category
• intent information

23
Presentation Contents

• Introduction Project Description
• Requirements Capture Concept Definition
• Detect and Avoid Requirements
• OUTCAST Concept
• Demonstrator Development
• Human Machine Interface
• System Integration and Certification
• Flight Tests
• Overview
• Active Scenarios for Conflict Assessment
• Analysis of Results
• Detect Track
• Situational Awareness and Conflict Assessment
• Questions

24
Phase 2 Demonstrator DevelopmentDetailed UAV
crew task overview
UAV crew
Pilot Flying
Payload Operator
UAV pilot
Traffic detected with potential for conflict?
Execute flight plan
Execute payload mission
Request classification visual tracking
Establish visual contact with intruder
Evasive manoeuvre needed?
Classify visual track intruder
N
Y
Plan and initiate evasive manoeuvre
Execute evasive manoeuvre
N
Clear of conflict?
Y
Initiate resumption of flight plan and payload
mission
Resume flight plan
Resume payload mission
25
Phase 2 Demonstrator DevelopmentBasic Traffic
HMI
selected TCAS intruder
Traffic display
Camera lateral beam
Camera vertical beam
Camera control buttons
Rotary Dials
26
Phase 2 Demonstrator Development Integration
and Certification
TCAS (as available on Citation)

• System Integration
• Hardware / Software / Cabling

• Data Recording
• Aircraft and test system parameters
• Video / Voice

27
Presentation Contents

• Introduction Project Description
• Requirements Capture Concept Definition
• Detect and Avoid Requirements
• OUTCAST Concept
• Demonstrator Development
• Human Machine Interface
• System Integration and Certification
• Flight Tests
• Overview
• Active Scenarios for Conflict Assessment
• Analysis of Results
• Detect Track
• Situational Awareness and Conflict Assessment
• Questions

28
Phase 3 Flight TestsOverview 33 measurement
flights executed
29
Phase 3 Flight Tests Scn type 2 active
collision scenarios

• Objective evaluate collision assessment and
  avoid
• Sometimes collision course / sometimes not
• UAV crew uninformed on geometry
• Avoidance, cued by UAV crew

Examples
30
Presentation Contents

• Introduction Project Description
• Requirements Capture Concept Definition
• Detect and Avoid Requirements
• OUTCAST Concept
• Demonstrator Development
• Human Machine Interface
• System Integration and Certification
• Flight Tests
• Overview
• Active Scenarios for Conflict Assessment
• Analysis of Results
• Detect Track
• Situational Awareness and Conflict Assessment
• Questions

31
Phase 4 Analysis of Results

• Registered Data
• Aircraft data GPS position
• ownship
• intruder
• EO/IR video
• EO/IR data (angles, FoV etc)
• TCAS data (ARINC 735A)
• Crew Voice
• HMI events inputs
• ATC radar data
• Crew Questionnaires

• Analysis Work
• Detection range
• TCAS, EO/IR, pilot visual
• Tracking Accuracy
• TCAS, EO/IR
• reference GPS
• TCAS TA/RA
• UAS Pilot Conflict Assessment
• UAS Crew Avoidance vs separation minima
• UAS crew timelines
• Detect Avoid Requirements

Small selection presented here
32
Detect and TrackDetection Range

• Average TCAS detection range
• PC7 _at_ 15 Nm gt 158 sec before CPA
• Fokker _at_ 22 Nm gt 210 sec before CPA
• F16 _at_ 6 13 Nm 50 sec 142 sec before CPA
• N.b. OUTCAST requirement was gt 90 sec

33
Tracking Accuracy TCAS accuracy versus GPS
location
2D Trajectory Red- Citation (GPS) Blue PC7
(GPS) Green PC7 according to TCAS Note ADS-B
would provide similar tracking performance as the
blue GPS plot
34
Tracking Accuracy Camera accuracy versus GPS
location
Red- autotrack azimuth Blue PC7 (GPS) Green
PC7 according to TCAS
35
Situational AwarenessHMI Issues Traffic Display

• Basic TCAS display was used
• inaccurate bearing leads to inaccurate position
  info
• no indication of direction of flight / trend
  information
• confirmed not meant as a separation provision
  tool!

clear of conflict?
OUTCAST Traffic Display
36
Situational AwarenessVideo Monitoring

• Video provides insight in intruder manoeuvring
• straight or turning flight
• ... but interpretation NOT Trivial
• Different and less intuitive than manned a/c
  pilot
• Combine camera angle with ownship attitude
• Further study Recommended
• Human Machine Interface
• UAS crew training requirements

37
Results Avoid (manoeuvring)
Effectiveness of manoeuvres used in OUTCAST

• Criteria
• Separation violation if horizontal lt0.5 Nm and
  vertical lt500 ft
• Near miss if horizontal lt500 ft and vertical
  lt350 ft

• Horizontal manoeuvres and combined did not always
  solve conflicts
• Incorrect direction (lack of situational
  awareness)
• Late manoeuvre (_at_180 kts, rate 1 turn radius
  almost 1 Nm)

38
Balance the Human and Computer... Recommended
Improvements

• Sensor fusion TCAS EO/IR
• better position and trend information
• correlation of intruders
• Automation of conflict assessment and conflict
  resolution
• Reconsider presentation of video info

clear of conflict?
OUTCAST Traffic Display
39
Level of Automation
Current ACAS
Future UAS ACAS
40
SAA requirements validation in flightSeparation
distances
Requirements

• Feedback from OUTCAST flight tests
• 0.5 Nm horizontal causes TCAS RAs UAS crew /
  pilot discomfort
• 500 ft vertical OK for pilots, but triggers
  TCAS TA/RA

41
Main Conclusions Recommendations

• Feedback to working groups on regulations and
  standards
• Ensure compatibility with TCAS and pilot comfort
• Requirements should support Sit. Awareness (not
  just detect)
• Structured safety assessment of DA requirements
  is needed
• Recommended System Improvements
• Data Fusion
• Range altitude from ACAS surveillance, bearing
  from EO/IR
• Matching intruders between cooperative and
  non-coop. sensors
• Find the right balance between Human and Computer
• Optimise situational awareness
• Assistance in conflict assessment and conflict
  resolution
• OUTCAST Concept feasible for state UAS (OAT)
• Provided regulations are in place (stepwise
  introduction)
• Provided required system improvements are
  addressed
• In combination with pragmatic procedures
• Next Steps
• Discuss with NLD MoD
• While solving the short-term... keep thinking
  about the long term

42
Acknowledgements

• - RNLAF aircraft
• Military ATC support

- Engineering support for functional integration
with Toplite

• All project participants...
• 16 departments in all 3 divisions
• a true multi-disciplinary effort

43
Questions?
Hard questions will be detected and avoided!