Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “FAA”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 109 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2008

Additional Technologies and Investigations for Provision of Future Aeronautical Communications

The following NASA Contractor Report documents the in-depth studies on select technologies that could support long-term aeronautical mobile communications operating concepts. This work was performed during the third and final phase of NASA s Technology Assessment for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)/EUROCONTROL Future Communications Study (FCS) under a multiyear NASA contract. It includes the associated findings of ITT Corporation and NASA Glenn Research Center to the FAA as of the end of May 2007. The activities documented in this report focus on three final technology candidates identified by the United States, and were completed before sufficient information about two additional technology candidates proposed by EUROCONTROL was made available. A separate report to be published by NASA/CR-2008-215144, entitled Final Report on Technology Investigations for Provision of Future Aeronautical Communications will include an assessment of all five final candidate technologies considered by the U.S. agencies (FAA and NASA) and EUROCONTROL. It will also provide an overview of the entire technology assessment process, including final recommendations. All three phases of this work were performed in compliance with the Terms of Reference for the Action Plan number 17 (AP-17) cooperative research agreement among EUROCONTROL, FAA, and NASA along with the general guidance of the FAA and EUROCONTROL available throughout this study.

Gilbert, Tricia↗
NASA NTRS2005

Initial Experimental Airworthiness Certification Guidance for UAS. UAS Experimental Certification Process and Guidance

This paper addresses the regulatory processes and requirements already in place by which an applicant might obtain experimental airworthiness certification for a civil Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS). It is more extensive and subsequent to an earlier, similar deliverable, PD007, which was an interim study of the same topic. Since few regulatory airworthiness and operating standards exist for UAS like those for traditional manned aircraft and since most UAS have historically been developed and operated under military auspices, civil use of UAS in the NAS is a new and unfamiliar challenge requiring specific and unique considerations. Experimental certification is the most basic level of FAA approval toward routine UAS operation in the NAS. The paper reviews and explains existing FAA requirements for an applicant seeking experimental airworthiness approval and details the process for submission of necessary information. It summarizes the limited purposes for which experimental aircraft may be used and addresses pertinent aspects of UAS design, construction and operation in the NAS in harmony with traditional manned aircraft. Policy IPT position is that UAS, while different from manned aircraft, can use the same initial processes to gain civil operating experience under the experimental approval. Particular note is taken of those UAS-unique characteristics which require extra attention to assure equivalent safety of operation, such as the UAS control station and sense-and-avoid. The paper also provides "best practices" guidance for UAS manufacturers and FAA personnel in two appendices. The material in Appendix A is intended to provide guidance on assuring UAS safety to FAA, and provides FAA personnel with a suggested list of items to review, with a focus on UAS unique factors, prior to issuance of an experimental airworthiness certificate. Appendix B provides an outline for a program letter which a manufacturer could use in preparing the application for an UAS experimental airworthiness certificate.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2012

One Engine Inoperative (OEI) and Autorotation For Heavy Lift Rotorcraft Systems

Federal Aviation Administration will certainly require the Heavy Lift Rotorcraft to be operated under Category A performance and operations requirements. Because of the weight, no operation will be allowed except Category A according to FAA Part 29.1(c). This means that any where along the flight path, the aircraft must be able to land safely following an engine failure or continue flight. A repeatable flight profile must be developed and executed to ensure that the aircraft can be safely landed or flown away depending on its location on the flight profile. This means that there will be no Height-Velocity testing required as is currently required for Part 29 Category B. Since all the configurations shown to date are different than existing rotorcraft, each type would have to develop their individual requirements under existing special conditions FAA Part 21.17(b). This means the FAA will take the opportunity to negotiate additional requirements or change requirements to ensure safety. For example, since the tiltrotor did not fit normal rotorcraft category, new rules were negotiated between the applicant and the FAA. As a result of this negotiation, performance requirements for Category A were increased. The rules were written in terms of guaranteed performance instead of Category A requirements. Detailed discussion will follow later. The proposed tiltrotor would likely follow along with the current tiltrotor rules with the possibility of increase Category A performance requirements. Compounding with addition of wing and auxiliary thrust to both the tandem and coaxial rotor would result in new special condition aircraft. To my knowledge, no compound tandem or compound coaxial rotor has ever been certified by FAA.

Wood, Tom↗
NASA NTRS2013

Evaluation of the Terminal Area Precision Scheduling and Spacing System for Performance-Based Navigation Arrivals

The growth of global demand for air transportation has put increasing strain on the nation's air traffic management system. To relieve this strain, the International Civil Aviation Organization has urged all nations to adopt Performance-Based Navigation (PBN), which can help to reduce air traffic congestion, decrease aviation fuel consumption, and protect the environment. NASA has developed a Terminal Area Precision Scheduling and Spacing (TAPSS) system that can support increased use of PBN during periods of high traffic, while supporting fuel-efficient, continuous descent approaches. In the original development of this system, arrival aircraft are assigned fuel-efficient Area Navigation (RNAV) Standard Terminal Arrival Routes before their initial descent from cruise, with routing defined to a specific runway. The system also determines precise schedules for these aircraft that facilitate continuous descent through the assigned routes. To meet these schedules, controllers are given a set of advisory tools to precisely control aircraft. The TAPSS system has been evaluated in a series of human-in-the-loop (HITL) air traffic simulations during 2010 and 2011. Results indicated increased airport arrival throughput up to 10 over current operations, and maintained fuel-efficient aircraft decent profiles from the initial descent to landing with reduced controller workload. This paper focuses on results from a joint NASA and FAA HITL simulation conducted in 2012. Due to the FAA rollout of the advance terminal area PBN procedures at mid-sized airports first, the TAPSS system was modified to manage arrival aircraft as they entered Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON). Dallas-Love Field airport (DAL) was selected by the FAA as a representative mid-sized airport within a constrained TRACON airspace due to the close proximity of a major airport, in this case Dallas-Ft Worth International Airport, one of the busiest in the world. To address this constraint, RNAV routes and Required Navigation Performance with the particular capability known as Radius-to-Fix (RNP-RF) approaches to a short final were used. The purpose of this simulation was to get feedback on how current operations could benefit with the TAPSS system and also to evaluate the efficacy of the advisory tools to support the broader use of PBN in the US National Airspace System. For this NASA-FAA joint experiment, an Air Traffic Control laboratory at NASA Ames was arranged to simulate arrivals into DAL in Instrument Meteorological Conditions utilizing parallel dependent approaches, with two feeder positions that handed off traffic to one final position. Four FAA controllers participated, alternately covering these three positions. All participants were Full-Performance Level terminal controllers and members of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association. During the simulation, PBN arrival operations were compared and contrasted in three conditions. They were the Baseline, where none of the TAPSS systems TRACON controller decision support advisories were provided, the Limited Advisories, reflecting the existing but dormant capabilities of the current terminal automation equipment with providing a subset of the TAPSS systems advisories; numerical delay, landing sequence, and runway assignment information, and the Full Advisories, with providing the following in addition to the ones in the Limited condition; trajectory slot markers, timelines of estimated times of arrivals and sched

Performance based navigation↗
NASA NTRS2019

Airspace Technology Demonstration 2 (ATD-2) Phase 2 Technology Description Document (TDD)

This Technology Description Document (TDD) provides an overview of the technology for the Phase 1 Baseline and Phase 2 Fused demonstrations of the Integrated Arrival, Departure, and Surface (IADS) prototype system of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Airspace Technology Demonstration 2 (ATD-2) project, which has been demonstrated since October of 2017 at Charlotte Douglas International Airport (CLT). Development, integration, and field demonstration of relevant technologies of the IADS system directly address recommendations made by the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) Integration Working Group (NIWG) on Surface and Data Sharing and the Surface Collaborative Decision Making (Surface CDM) concept of operations developed jointly by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and aviation industry partners. NASA has been developing the IADS traffic management system under the ATD-2 project in coordination with the FAA, flight operators, CLT airport operators, and the National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA). The primary goal of ATD-2 is to improve the predictability and operational efficiency of the air traffic system in metroplex environments, through the enhancement, development, and integration of the nation’s most advanced and sophisticated arrival, departure, and surface prediction, scheduling, and management systems. The ATD-2 project is a 5-year research activity beginning in 2015 and extending through 2020. The Phase 1 Baseline IADS capability resulting from the ATD-2 research has been demonstrated at the CLT airport since the beginning of October 2017. Phase 1 provided data exchange and integration with the initial demonstration of the integrated system of strategic and tactical scheduling, collaborative tactical surface metering, tactical departure scheduling to an en route meter point and overhead stream insertion, initial integration of a TFDM SWIM prototype feed, and an early implementation prototype of a Terminal Flight Data Manager (TFDM) Electronic Flight Data (EFD) system. The strategic surface scheduling element of the capability is consistent with the Surface CDM Concept of Operations published in 2014 by the FAA Surface Operations Directorate.1 The Phase 2 Fused IADS system provided substantial updates to baseline IADS Demonstration capability. Improvements were made to the IADS modeler; tactical surface scheduling, and metering; tactical departure scheduling for overhead stream insertion; Electronic Flight Data (EFD) and the integration with the FAA Advanced Electronic Flight Strip (AEFS); RTC/RMTC, and departure trajectories. New capabilities included a TFDM SWIM prototype feed and delivery of IADS data via the TFDM Terminal Publication (TTP) service of the FAA’s SWIM system; strategic surface scheduling and metering as well as fusion with tactical surface metering; integration and ingestion of data from TTP-connected Mobile App and texting industry for General Aviation (GA) flights; and expansion of airspace deployments to include adjacent Center automation, in particular interface with the Atlanta Center (ZTL) arrival metering TBFM system to evaluate pre-scheduling of flights. Improvements in Data Analysis and System Health (DASH) monitoring and updates were completed as well.

Talebi, Ehsan↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Corridor Design and Analysis for UAM Operations

The Urban Air Mobility (UAM) concept is a part of Advanced Air Mobility (AAM), a joint initiative between the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), NASA, and industry to develop an air transportation system that uses new electric (i.e., green) air vehicles in geographical areas previously underserved by traditional aviation. Market forecast studies predict that there will be demand for alternate modes of air transportation using electric Vertical Take-off and Landing aircraft. UAM expands transportation networks by introducing short flights to move people and goods around metropolitan areas​. UAM is expected to improve mobility for the public, decongest road traffic, reduce trip time, and decrease strain on existing public transportation networks. Various challenges exist to make the introduction of UAM operations successful in the U.S. National Airspace System (NAS). These include but are not limited to integration with existing airports and airspace, provision of air traffic services (e.g., separation), vehicle design and certification, and community acceptance. The focus of this paper is on integration of UAM operations into the NAS via introduction of new airspace structures. UAM will operate within a regulatory, operational, and technical environment that is incorporated into the NAS​. As per the UAM Concept of Operations (ConOps), the FAA retains regulatory authority and is responsible for establishing operational parameters and maintaining oversight. The FAA’s UAM ConOps describes flights at low altitudes (below 5,000 ft) with minimal disruption to established conventional aircraft traffic and limited voice interactions with the Air Traffic Control (ATC). Early stages of UAM may use existing procedures to safely integrate UAM with conventional flights. This would involve flying under Part 91 Visual Flight Rules (VFR) and using voice for communications. The initial UAM ecosystem will utilize the current infrastructure such as routes, helipads, and ATC services, where practicable. ​A NASA study explored the use of existing helicopter routes in Dallas Fort Worth (DFW) airspace for initial UAM operations with a Letter of Agreement (LOA) that included procedures to request a Class B (controlled airspace) clearance. The research showed that the chosen approach was feasible for near-term, low-demand UAM traffic, but was not scalable. The growth of operations in today’s aviation system has resulted in airspace reorganization and procedures to ensure safety and efficiency as traffic rates increase. One proposed operating innovation that can help with the scalability of UAM is establishing routes and corridors. This may look similar to the Area Navigation (RNAV) procedures used today to streamline operations into busy airports. However, instead of FAA automation systems and ATC managing the flow of traffic, some UAM concepts envision a third-party service provider performing this role as part of the Provider of Services for UAM (PSU) network. The FAA’s UAM ConOps posits that new airspace structures such as UAM corridors include the following design criteria: 1) Minimal impact on existing NAS operations, 2) no or minimal additional ATC services, 3) public interest considerations such as noise, safety, and security, and 4) customer needs. The airspace available in urban environments is limited by the height of buildings, the effect of weather including wind gusts, privacy needs, and a clearance envelope. The new airspace structure would need to be designed around large airports and urban areas where the initial market demand is likely to exist. NASA has started evaluating airspace in the Dallas Fort Worth area to design new airspace structures, keeping the first two design criteria in mind. It is assumed that there will be an on-board pilot-in-command, and the flights will operate under VFR in Visual Meteorological Conditions. Corridors will be required in controlled airspace, whereas UAM operations can fly in uncontrolled Class G and E airspace using current day rules. Keeler et. al identified factors and heuristics for development of routes for UAM operations for integration with airspace close to large airports such as Dallas Fort Worth and Dallas Love Field. This paper describes the heuristics applied to define the corridors, analyzes them with respect to legacy traffic and presents key results.

Urban Air Mobility↗
NASA NTRS2022

National Campaign (NC)-1 Strategic Conflict Management Simulation (X4) Community Based Rules

Projected demand for transportation services in the urban environment has led to the development of several Concepts of Operation for Urban Air Mobility, or UAM. UAM is a concept for the transportation of people and goods in the metropolitan environment using small, efficient aircraft over short distances as part of an expanding multimodal transportation network. UAM will leverage emerging technologies including electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing (eVTOL) aircraft, increasing levels of automation and a new operational paradigm in dense airspace where a set of agreed-upon rules govern the procedures and interactions defining a cooperative environment in which operators are entrusted with a range of functions typically conducted by Air Traffic Control (ATC). These rules, proposed in the FAA NextGen Office’s UAM Concept of Operations [1], were originally termed Community Based Rules or Community Business Rules (CBRs), and will in the future termed Cooperative Operating Practices (COPs); this document uses the original term, CBR. CBRs are a set of rules, developed by the UAM community and (where necessary) approved by the FAA that govern the interactions between UAM entities and limit the need for ATC services including, but not limited to, separation control by ATC, addressing a fundamental challenge to scaling UAM operations. UAM community development of CBRs is anticipated to accelerate the adoption of new practices while retaining the regulatory authority of the FAA within required domains (e.g., NAS safety, security and equal access). However, there currently exists no agreed industry forum or defined procedures for CBR development. Investigation of best practices for the development of UAM CBRs was identified by NASA and the FAA NextGen Office as a research need. In collaboration with seven industry partners, NASA participated in a series of simulations that investigated elements of the envisioned UAM operations, with a primary focus on Strategic Conflict Management (SCM). The development and conduct of cooperative UAM simulations with seven industry partners provided a unique opportunity to investigate CBR development practices. Development of CBRs for the UAM SCM simulations was conducted in parallel with simulation capability development and was closely related to requirements definition for the simulations. As such, the CBR development effort presented herein had two objectives: explore CBR development practices in collaboration with the industry partners and develop an initial set of UAM CBRs to support simulation requirements definition and development. Consensus was achieved among NASA and the industry partners on 24 CBRs that were developed to support the cooperative simulation operations across five topic areas: General (related to test requirements), Operational Intent, Conformance Monitoring, Demand Capacity Balancing, and Airspace Constraint Management. Additional topic areas and CBRs were discussed but were deemed outside the scope of the simulation; these are included in the appendices. A collaborative, iterative process was employed for developing the CBRs engaging both NASA and Industry; because CBR development is envisioned to be community-driven, opportunities were sought that provided industry partners leadership roles in developing CBRs. The following key observations and recommendations may aid the UAM industry in future CBR development efforts: - The lack of a defined process proved challenging initially. Stakeholder engagement in the early stages of CBR development was intermittent and may have been due to the lack of a clear definition of roles and responsibilities of those involved in the effort. - Industry leadership of CBR topic areas proved successful. Discussions in these topic areas were engaging, with alternate viewpoints freely discussed and detailed CBRs resulting. This points to the importance of identifying the best-suited leadership in technical areas for CBR development. - Discussions within a CBR topic area were typically dominated by only a few participants. Whereas all industry partners contributed to CBR development, within each topic area, technical leadership was evident even when not formally established. This observation may indicate that smaller, focused groups may be more effective in initial CBR development than an open forum or large standards development effort (although both maybe required prior to FAA review and approval for some CBRs). - Identifying suitable forums for initial UAM CBR development and identifying the most effective industry participants and leadership will be crucial for successful CBR development. Although the operational need for UAM CBRs may not be immediate, establishing the forums and leadership to define the processes for CBR development is a prudent early step to UAM realization.

Community Based Rules↗
NASA NTRS2024

Survey of Methods for Assessing Safety Compliance of sUAS BVLOS Operations

To ensure the safety of small Unmanned Aircraft System (sUAS) Beyond Line of Sight (BVLOS) operations in the National Airspace System (NAS), the FAA offers a guideline on how sUAS operators can demonstrate compliance with FAA rules, including regulations, advisory circulars, policy statements, and acceptable means of compliance (AMOC), using a formal and top-down approach. According to FAA Advisory Circular 23.2010-1, the AMOC refers to “one method, but not the only method, to show compliance with a regulatory requirement.” It is common for regulations to include a performance and safety standard rather than a detailed design or operation requirement, which allows for flexibility in fulfilling the regulatory requirements while still achieving a predetermined level of safety. This technical report explores existing frameworks for sUAS BVLOS safety analysis. It begins by discussing how sUAS BVLOS operations can be strategically deconflicted and then discusses their hazards. The next step is to establish safety assessment methods commonly used by the aviation industry and the FAA, illustrate how these methods can be applied to several safety-critical air traffic systems, and list collision models that the FAA and industry use. This investigation documents the processes for assessing safety risks in sUAS BVLOS operations and will allow sUAS BVLOS operations to be assessed for safety compliance more efficiently.

sUAS BVLOS Operations↗
DOE OSTI2023

The globus compute dataset: An open function-as-a-service dataset from the edge to the cloud

Here we present a unique function-as-a-service (FaaS) dataset capturing the use of the Globus Compute (previously funcX) platform. Globus Compute implements a federated model via which users may deploy endpoints on arbitrary remote computers, from the edge to high performance computing (HPC) cluster, and they may then invoke Python functions on those endpoints via a reliable cloud -hosted service. The dataset covers 31 weeks and includes 2121472 task submissions from 252 users executed on 580 remote computing endpoints. It includes 277386 registered functions. We describe the dataset and various observations, some that are similar to other FaaS datasets, for example, that 74% of tasks run for less than 1 s, and some that are unique to Globus Compute, for example, that endpoints are used in different ways and that the majority of functions are related to scientific computing and machine learning. To the best of our knowledge, this dataset represents the first federated FaaS dataset that includes user workloads, distributed computing endpoints, and analysis of registered function bodies. We expect the dataset to be useful for researching FaaS architectures, workload modeling, container warming, and other distributed computing architectures.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
NASA NTRS1965

Ballistocardiography, a Bibliography <1877 - 1964<

The publication of this bibliography on Ballistocardiography, NASA SP-7021 (FAA AM 65-15) fulfills a long-standing requirement for a comprehensive and retrospective collection of references on a subject that is of particular interest to medical investigators and cardiovascular physiologists engaged in aerospace studies. Ballistocardiography is a technique for producing a graphical representation of repetitive motions of the human body arising from the sudden ejection of blood into the great vessels with each heart beat. Standard ballistocardiographic techniques are emphasized in the references included in the bibliography, but attention is also given to several related methods that are used to record these phenomena and to the equipment and instrumentation employed in such investigations. The format of the citations in NASA SP-7021 (FAA AM 65-15) was chosen to resemble, as closely as possible, the format that is now being used in the Index Medicwl published by the National Library of Medicine, except that English titles of foreign language articles appear in parentheses instead of in brackets as they do in Index Medicus. In each case, an attempt was made to identify the language of the article, or the place of publication of the foreign language journal. Since the citations were gathered over a period of years and occasionally from sources which do not appear in standard indexes, complete information was not always available. Citations are arranged alphabetically by personal author. In a large measure, the comprehensivenes of this collection of references is due to information obtained from card files compiled and maintained by Dr. William R. Scarborough of the Georgetown Clinical Research Institute, Office of Aviation Medicine, FAA, supplemented by the private collections of Drs. Isaac Starr, Abraham Noordergraaf, and John L. Nickerson. Selection and preparation of individual references and general editing of the material was done by Dr. Scarborough, who received valuable assistance from Mrs. Claire Tedesco of the Medical Library Branch of the FAA Library. Final compilation and printing were completed under the supervision of NASA.

AEROSPACE MEDICINE↗
NASA NTRS1977

Evaluation of Federal Aviation Administration ion engine exhaust sampling rake

A FAA exhaust emissions rake was tested in the Experimental Clean Combustor Program, Phase 3 to permit comparison of the values of gaseous emissions and smoke measured by the FAA rake with those measured with the NASA Pratt and Whitney Aircraft (P and WA) rake used in the Phase 3 Experimental Clean Combustor Program and with station seven probes. The results showed that the levels of CO, THC, NOx and smoke measured by the FAA and NASA/P and WA rakes agree well at high power, but that CO emissions measured by the FAA rake were approximately 10 percent higher than those measured by the NASA/P and WA rake at low power.

Fiorentino, A. J.↗
NASA NTRS1997

Aviation Safety Reporting System: Process and Procedures

The Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS) was established in 1976 under an agreement between the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). This cooperative safety program invites pilots, air traffic controllers, flight attendants, maintenance personnel, and others to voluntarily report to NASA any aviation incident or safety hazard. The FAA provides most of the program funding. NASA administers the program, sets its policies in consultation with the FAA and aviation community, and receives the reports submitted to the program. The FAA offers those who use the ASRS program two important reporting guarantees: confidentiality and limited immunity. Reports sent to ASRS are held in strict confidence. More than 350,000 reports have been submitted since the program's beginning without a single reporter's identity being revealed. ASRS removes all personal names and other potentially identifying information before entering reports into its database. This system is a very successful, proof-of-concept for gathering safety data in order to provide timely information about safety issues. The ASRS information is crucial to aviation safety efforts both nationally and internationally. It can be utilized as the first step in safety by providing the direction and content to informed policies, procedures, and research, especially human factors. The ASRS process and procedures will be presented as one model of safety reporting feedback systems.

Connell, Linda J.↗
NASA NTRS2002

Investigation Into The Needs of Part 135 Operators to Access Airports Restricted Under FAR Part 135 Sections 135.213, 135.219 and/or 135.225

NASA and the FAA have joint interests and responsibilities for developing guidelines and standards for cockpit displays of Flight Information Services (FIS) information and for developing enhancements to the planned FAA Data Link (FISDL) services. NASA and the FAA have established responsibilities in connection with development tasks for enhancements to the FISDL project. This report is the result of NASA Task 2, "Weather Support Concept- Part 135 Operations." The objective of the task was to determine the needs of Part 135 operators as they relate to FAA Part 135 Sections 135.213, 135.219 and 135.225, which pertain to weather reporting requirements at destination airports. This report discusses the results of two questionnaires completed by volunteer Part 135 operators that questioned their operations, their needs for flying to airports without weather reporting compatibilities, and suggestions for modifying FARs 135.213, 135.219 and 135.225. The operators pointed out airports in areas of the CONUS that were needed for IFR operations but lacked weather reporting capabilities and they offered practical suggestions for changes to the FARs. Related to operators's needs, and discussed in this report, were the Fractional Ownership NPRM and the possible impact of GPS WAAS and LAAS approaches.

Eckert, Clifford A.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Compliance with High-Intensity Radiated Fields Regulations - Emitter's Perspective

NASA's Deep Space Network (DSN) uses high-power transmitters on its large antennas to communicate with spacecraft of NASA and its partner agencies. The prime reflectors of the DSN antennas are parabolic, at 34m and 70m in diameter. The DSN transmitters radiate Continuous Wave (CW) signals at 20 kW - 500 kW at X-band and S-band frequencies. The combination of antenna reflector size and high frequency results in a very narrow beam with extensive oscillating near-field pattern. Another unique feature of the DSN antennas is that they (and the radiated beam) move mostly at very slow sidereal rate, essentially identical in magnitude and at the opposite direction of Earth rotation.The DSN is in the process of revamping its documentation to provide analysis of the High Intensity Radiation Fields (HIRF) environment resulting from radio frequency radiation from DSN antennas for comparison to FAA regulations regarding certification of HIRF protection as outlined in the FAA regulations on HIRF protection for aircraft electrical and electronic systems (Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) [section sign][section sign] 23.1308, 25.1317, 27.1317, and 29.1317).This paper presents work done at JPL, in consultation with the FAA. The work includes analysis of the radiated field structure created by the unique DSN emitters (combination of transmitters and antennas) and comparing it to the fields defined in the environments in the FAA regulations. The paper identifies areas that required special attention, including the implications of the very narrow beam of the DSN emitters and the sidereal rate motion. The paper derives the maximum emitter power allowed without mitigation and the mitigation zones, where required.Finally, the paper presents summary of the results of the analyses of the DSN emitters and the resulting DSN process documentation.

DSN emitters↗
NASA NTRS2007

A Study to Estimate the Effectiveness of Visual Testing Training for Aviation Maintenance Management

The Air Commerce Act of 1926 set the beginning for standards in aviation maintenance. Even after deregulation in the late l970s, maintenance standards and requirements still have not changed far from their initial criteria. After a potential candidate completes Federal Aviation Administration training prerequisites, they may test for their Airframe and Powerplant (A&P) certificate. Performing maintenance in the aviation industry for a minimum of three years, the technician may then test for their Inspection Authorization (IA). After receiving their Airframe and Powerplant certificate, a technician is said to have a license to perform. At no time within the three years to eligibility for Inspection Authorization are they required to attend higher-level inspection training. What a technician learns in the aviation maintenance industry is handed down from a seasoned technician to the new hire or is developed from lessons learned on the job. Only in Europe has the Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA) required higher-level training for their aviation maintenance technicians in order to control maintenance related accidents (Lu, 2005). Throughout the 1990s both the General Accounting Office (GAO) and the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) made public that the FAA is historically understaffed (GAO, 1996). In a safety recommendation the NTSB stated "The Safety Board continues to lack confidence in the FAA's commitment to provide effective quality assurance and safety oversight of the ATC system (NTSB, 1990)." The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has been known to be proactive in creating safer skies. With such reports you would suspect the FAA to also be proactive in developing more stringent inspection training for aviation maintenance technicians. The purpose of this study is to estimate the effectiveness of higher-level inspection training, such as Visual Testing (VT) for aviation maintenance technicians, to improve the safety of aircraft and to make recommendations to management with regard to the value of such training.

Law, Lewis Lyle↗
NASA NTRS2014

Overview of Research Transition Products

Demonstrate increased, more consistent use of Performance‐ Based Navigation (PBN). Accelerate transfer of NASA scheduling and spacing technologies for inclusion in late mid‐term NAS. During high‐fidelity human‐in‐the‐loop simulations of Terminal Sequencing and Spacing, air traffic controllers have significantly improved their use of PBN procedures during busy traffic periods without increased workload. Executed an aggressive, short timeframe development schedule. Developed TSS prototype based upon FAA operational systems. Conducted multiple joint FAA/NASA human‐in‐the‐loop simulations. Performed repeated incremental deliveries of tech transfer material to non‐traditional RTT stakeholders. Will continue to participate in later phases of FAA acquisition process. ATD‐1 transferred Terminal Sequencing and Spacing (TSS) technologies to the FAA. TSS enables routine use of underutilized advanced avionics and PBN procedures. Potential benefits to airlines operating at initial TSS sites estimated to be $300‐400M/year. FAA is planning for an initial capability in the NAS in 2018.

Technology Transfer↗
NASA NTRS2018

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM) National Campaign II

The Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM) effort at NASA aims to enable access to low-altitude airspace for small UAS. This goal is being pursued partly through partnerships that NASA has developed with the UAS stakeholder community, the FAA, other government agencies, and the designated FAA UAS Test Sites. By partnering with the FAA UAS Test Sites, NASA's UTM project has performed a geographically diverse, simultaneous set of UAS operations at locations in six states. The demonstrations used an architecture that was developed by NASA in partnership with the FAA to safely coordinate such operations. These demonstrations-the second or 'Technical Capability Level (TCL 2)' National Campaign of UTM testing-was performed from May 15 through June 9, 2017. Multiple UAS operations occurred during the testing at sites located in Alaska, Nevada, Texas, North Dakota, Virginia, and New York with multiple organizations serving as UAS Service Suppliers and/or UAS Operators per the specifications provided by NASA. By engaging various members of the UAS community in development and operational roles, this campaign provided initial validation of different aspects of the UTM concept including: UAS Service Supplier technologies and procedures; geofencing technologies/conformance monitoring; ground-based surveillance/sense and avoid; airborne sense and avoid; communication, navigation, surveillance; and human factors related to UTM data creation and display. Additionally, measures of performance were defined and calculated from the flight data to establish quantitative bases for comparing flight test activities and to provide potential metrics that might be routinely monitored in future operational UTM systems.

Aweiss, Arwa S.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Airspace Technology Demonstration 2 (ATD-2) Phase 1 Concept of Use (ConUse)

This document presents an operational Concept of Use (ConUse) for the Phase 1 Baseline Integrated Arrival, Departure, and Surface (IADS) prototype system of NASA's Airspace Technology Demonstration 2 (ATD-2) sub-project, which began demonstration in 2017 at Charlotte Douglas International Airport (CLT). NASA is developing the IADS system under the ATD-2 sub-project in coordination with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and aviation industry partners. The primary goal of ATD-2 sub-project is to improve the predictability and the operational efficiency of the air traffic system in metroplex environments, through the enhancement, development, and integration of the nation's most advanced and sophisticated arrival, departure, and surface prediction, scheduling, and management systems. The ATD-2 effort is a five-year research activity through 2020. The initial phase of the ATD-2 sub-project, which is the focus of this document, will demonstrate the Phase 1 Baseline IADS capability at CLT in 2017. The Phase 1 Baseline IADS capabilities of the ATD-2 sub-project consists of: (a) Strategic and tactical surface scheduling to improve efficiency and predictability of airport surface operations, (b) Tactical departure scheduling to enhance merging of departures into overhead traffic streams via accurate predictions of takeoff times and automated coordination between the Airport Traffic Control Tower (ATCT, or Tower) and the Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC, or Center), (c) Improvements in departure surface demand predictions in Time Based Flow Management (TBFM), (d) A prototype Electronic Flight Data (EFD) system provided by the FAA via the Terminal Flight Data Manager (TFDM) early implementation effort, and (e) Improved situational awareness and demand predictions through integration with the Traffic Flow Management System (TFMS), TBFM, and TFDM (3Ts) for electronic data integration and exchange, and an on-screen dashboard displaying pertinent analytics in real-time. The surface scheduling and metering element of the capability is consistent with the Surface CDM Concept of Operations published in 2014 by the FAA Surface Operations Directorate.1 Upon successful demonstration of the Phase 1 Baseline IADS capability, follow-on demonstrations of the matured IADS traffic management capabilities will be conducted in the 2018-2020 timeframe. At the end of each phase of the demonstrations, NASA will transfer the ATD-2 sub-project technology to the FAA and industry partners.

integrated arrival↗