Cooperative Operating Practices
Presentation that describes the potential Cooperative Operating Practices in Upper Class E airspace
ETM, Cooperative operation↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “Cooperative Operating Practices”
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.
ETM Industry: Tabletop Defining Notions for Cooperative Operating Practices
This tabletop plans to cover 3 main topics in regards to the research that NASA has conducted for High-E Traffic Management (ETM), as well as implementing it to stand up an ETM system in the Airspace Operations Lab to invite industry participants to join us in a collaborative evaluation at the end of 2023. (Or earlier for system architectural connectivity). Working to define the notions that go into Cooperative Operating Practices for a collaborative traffic management process, we will be showing and training to some of our early prototype concepts and discussing: 1. Operational Intent: We have built an OI generation tool and would like to discuss specifics to the requirements of OI size, update rates, and duration. 2. Strategic Conflict Detection: We have built a concept to detect overlapping OI’s and would like to discuss the output information; time horizon, geometry and confidence level of intersection. In addition we are looking at a service that would provide all users with additional information in regards to the probability of your actual flight intent getting within a specified separation envelope. 3. Cooperative Operating Practices (COPS): Specifically looking at COPs for strategic deconfliction, we are looking to industry to build the actual COPS based on various criteria; vehicle-to-vehicle interactions, or company to company agreements. What is the strategy when OIs intersect; wait and see, take a pre-negotiated COPS action, or ad-hoc negotiation and discuss what that looks like.
High-E Traffic Management (ETM)↗
Roadmap to Cooperative Operating Practices for Strategic Conflict Detection and Resolution in the Upper Class E Traffic Management Concept
As the governing body of flight operations in the highly anticipated emergent area of Upper Class E airspace (60,000 ft and above), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has recognized the potential for a possible extensible traffic management system for new entrants into this domain. Following the successes with Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM) and Advanced / Urban Air Mobility (AAM / UAM) Traffic Management programs, FAA put forth an initial concept of operations for supporting the start of the Upper Class E Traffic Management (ETM) concept. Like UTM and AAM / UAM, ETM is envisioned to also be a community-based, industry driven cooperative management concept. However, tailoring it to be adaptable to the atmospheric communication, navigation, and surveillance deficits, as well as the diverse vehicle and mission profiles operating in the ETM environment will be the challenge. As such, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Ames Research Center has been investigating several technologies that will help enable industry in the development of this new type of cooperative operating environment. These technologies are being prototyped and will be tested in a collaborative evaluation of an initial ETM system in late 2023. The evaluation will concentrate on building out ETM system technologies that will inform the participants regarding operational intent sharing, strategic conflict detection, and the resultant deconfliction process. In addition to the technical aspects, key roles and responsibilities will need to be defined. This will be done through exploring community-agreed upon Cooperative Operating Practices (COPs) that include procedures and capabilities to aid in timely, strategic conflict identification and resolution to be developed during the evaluation. As an initial step to the evaluation, the ETM research team at NASA Ames solicited industry feedback on various aspects of ETM operations from subject matter experts. A virtual tabletop walkthrough session was held over a two-day period to follow a roadmap through the functional steps needed to build COPs, focusing on strategic conflict detection and resolution.
Upper Class E Traffic Management (ETM)↗
Roadmap to Cooperative Operating Practices for Strategic Conflict Detection and Resolution in the Upper Class-E Traffic Management Concept
As the governing body of flight operations in the highly anticipated emergent area of Upper Class E airspace (60,000 ft and above), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has recognized the potential for a possible extensible traffic management system for new entrants into this domain. Following the successes with Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM) and Advanced / Urban Air Mobility (AAM / UAM) Traffic Management programs, FAA put forth an initial concept of operations for supporting the start of the Upper Class E Traffic Management (ETM) concept. Like UTM and AAM / UAM, ETM is envisioned to also be a community-based, industry driven cooperative management concept. However, tailoring it to be adaptable to the atmospheric communication, navigation, and surveillance deficits, as well as the diverse vehicle and mission profiles operating in the ETM environment will be the challenge. As such, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Ames Research Center has been investigating several technologies that will help enable industry in the development of this new type of cooperative operating environment. These technologies are being prototyped and will be tested in a collaborative evaluation of an initial ETM system in late 2023. The evaluation will concentrate on building out ETM system technologies that will inform the participants regarding operational intent sharing, strategic conflict detection, and the resultant deconfliction process. In addition to the technical aspects, key roles and responsibilities will need to be defined. This will be done through exploring community-agreed upon Cooperative Operating Practices (COPs) that include procedures and capabilities to aid in timely, strategic conflict identification and resolution to be developed during the evaluation. As an initial step to the evaluation, the ETM research team at NASA Ames solicited industry feedback on various aspects of ETM operations from subject matter experts. A virtual tabletop walkthrough session was held over a two-day period to follow a roadmap through the functional steps needed to build COPs, focusing on strategic conflict detection and resolution. Overall, the ETM tabletop provided insights into how the community wanted to instantiate the generation and sharing of operational intent, detect strategic conflicts and resolve those conflicts using a preliminary set of procedural community-agreed upon COPs.
Upper Class-E Traffic Management (ETM)↗
Decentralized and Asynchronous Planning for Cooperative Practices in High Altitude Digitally Enabled Operations
Cooperative practices will likely be foundational to future digitally enabled airspace operations characterized by decentralized and asynchronous decision-making. This paper explores the implementation of cooperative practices in high-altitude airspace. The digitally enabled operations framework, under exploratory investigation by NASA as a potential new operating mode, which is enabled and dependent on digital technologies and information sharing, may create new operational possibilities for a wide range of vehicle types and missions. An essential element of the operating mode framework under investigation, cooperative practices, could empower operators to manage critical functions such as deconfliction, equitable airspace usage, and demand-capacity balancing. The use of cooperative practices would involve asynchronous flight information sharing and decentralized conflict management by operators, representing a major change from traditional air traffic services that use synchronous surveillance information to support centralized decision-making by air traffic controllers. This paper details three key components for implementing cooperative practices for decentralized, digitally enabled operations: (a) intent modeling and sharing, (b) conflict detection, and (c) cooperative deconfliction.
cooperative operating practics↗
NExCT Cooperative Operating Practices Framework
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Will Cummings-Grande↗
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↗
Upper Class E Traffic Management: NASA's Collaborative Research and Technical Development to Enable Routine, Safe, and Scalable High Altitude Operation
In the past, operations at high altitudes have been limited in number and largely conducted for defense/security purposes. However, with broad technological advances, a growing number of commerical and public good use cases, and a significant rise in the number of capable platforms, the demand for operating in high altitude airspace - known as upper Class E in the United States - is increasing. With that increase in demand comes the need for a means to manage the airspace in a way that does not burden current air traffic services and infrastructure given that provisions for commercial operations are limited. NASA, in collaboration with other government agencies and strong representation from industry, has developed a cooperative approach to airspace management referred to as Upper Class E Traffic Management (ETM). Key aspects of the ETM concept are the ability to exchange information through services that enable the operators to share airspace in cetain areas by adhering to cooperative operating practices (COPs) and by having shared situation awareness. To advance the concept, NASA recently developed and formally tested the first dedicated reference ETM system and supportin architecture. The test involved real-time simulation of high altitude operations with a diverse set of aircraft and encourter situations that included industry partners connected to the system from their remote operating centers. This presentation will provide attendees with an understanding of the ETM concept, the details and importance of the system that has been developed, an overview of the groundbreaking simulation, and a glimpse of things to come in our next steps.
Conrad Dang-Gabriel↗
Provider of Services for Urban Air Mobility (PSU) Prototype Simulation (X5) Final Report
Urban Air Mobility (UAM) is a new air transportation service concept to carry passengers or cargo in metropolitan areas, leveraged by innovative aircraft and air traffic automation technologies. NASA has conducted a series of simulations, called the X-series simulation, to evaluate the UAM concept of operations and support the development of airspace procedures and services for UAM operations. The simulation called “X5” was conducted in 2023 to test a Provider of Services for UAM (PSU) prototype developed by NASA for UAM flight planning, strategic conflict management support, and data exchange between UAM operators. In this simulation, two strategic conflict management capabilities, Demand-Capacity Balancing and Sequencing and Scheduling, were further investigated. This document describes the UAM system architecture modeled, the X5 simulation environment to be executed (e.g., traffic scenario and UAM airspace construct), and the strategic conflict management processes developed and evaluated in this study. Then, the simulation results are provided using several system performance metrics, such as the number of operations planned and activated, demand-capacity imbalances detected and resolved, and pre-departure delays. Based on these metrics, the test findings and lessons learned from this simulation are discussed. NASA developed a PSU prototype as part of a reference implementation of UAM system architecture and evolved strategic conflict management capabilities for UAM operations from the previous collaborative simulations with industry partners. Below is the summary of the achievements: - Aligned NASA’s UAM reference architecture with the FAA’s UAM ConOps notional architecture - Extended UAM airspace management capabilities to include 1) Demand-Capacity Balancing (DCB) to ensure operators coordinate planned usage of shared vertiports, and 2) Sequencing and Scheduling (S&S) at UAM corridor entry and exit points to help facilitate an orderly flow of traffic - Defined the PSU information exchange APIs and requirements towards informing industry standards - Developed and tested a NASA PSU prototype as reference implementation to validate the requirements and APIs - Developed a prototype service connecting NASA’s PSU and the FAA system for testing future PSU-ATM interface requirements - Tested NASA-developed assumptions for UAM operations such as airspace design, procedures, vehicle performance, and strategic conflict management methods to inform future Cooperative Operating Practices (COPs) development with industry - Evaluated system performance metrics such as number of simultaneous operations and ground delays that can help define system-level requirements. The simulation results showed that the UAM traffic demand could be managed to minimize the needs of tactical separation provision with ground delays assigned by DCB and S&S. These accomplishments and the lessons learned from the PSU Prototype X5 simulation activities will be valuable inputs for the Air Mobility Pathfinders (AMP) project, which is NASA’s new project to create and evaluate a reference architecture for safe, secure, and scalable UAM operations.
Simulation↗
Cooperative Separation in Upper Class E Airspace
This document presents baseline functional requirements for a prototype NASA research Upper Class E Traffic Management (ETM) system to enable the cooperative separation concept [1, 2]. The baseline functional requirements are developed by incorporating inputs from NASA and the FAA researchers and engineering staff, and industry partners while accounting for the unique performance characteristics and mission needs of various existing and future ETM vehicle types. The functionalities include information sharing for situational awareness, conformance monitoring, and operating practices for cooperative separation. Several realistic traffic scenarios were built to test, validate, and demonstrate the cooperatively managed operation in the ETM environment and the associated capabilities in a simulation environment.
Upper Class E Air Traffic Management↗
Initial Analysis of Digitally Enabled Cooperative Operations in Class D Terminal Airspace
The primary contribution of this paper is an initial analysis of integrating digitally enabled cooperative operations (or digital operations for short) with Visual Flight Rules (VFR) and Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations in the terminal airspace around a Class D airport, specifically around Fort Worth Alliance airport (KAFW). Enabled by connected digital technologies and automated information exchange, digital operations as envisioned would utilize cooperative practices and operator-responsible separation to ensure safety. In the present study, three conflict management configurations for digital operations were analyzed: 1) centralized with a single instance of a conflict management service to model a scenario with only one fleet operator conducting digital operations or all fleet operators utilizing the same service, 2) federated with two different instances to model a scenario with two different fleet operators conducting digital operations, and 3) fully distributed with a different instance for each digital operation. In simulations in which recorded tracks for VFR and IFR operations were played back and digital operations were modeled that would nominally arrive at KAFW once every 20 minutes (given no conflict resolution maneuvers), there were one or fewer losses of separation (LOS) across the three conflict management configurations. The same result was seen in simulations in which digital operations would nominally arrive at KAFW once every 10 minutes. However, in simulations in which digital operations would nominally arrive at KAFW once every 5 minutes, the number of LOS ranged between six and ten. This highlights the need for follow-on research to investigate the extent to which additional capabilities for digital operations, such as complexity management and/or flow organization, may be needed.
digitally enabled cooperative operations↗
Initial Analysis of Digitally Enabled Cooperative Operations in Class D Terminal Airspace
The primary contribution of this paper is an initial analysis of integrating digitally enabled cooperative operations (or digital operations for short) with Visual Flight Rules (VFR) and Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations in the terminal airspace around a Class D airport, specifically around Fort Worth Alliance airport (KAFW). Enabled by connected digital technologies and automated information exchange, digital operations as envisioned would utilize cooperative practices and operator-responsible separation to ensure safety. In the present study, three conflict management configurations for digital operations were analyzed: 1) centralized with a single instance of a conflict management service to model a scenario with only one fleet operator conducting digital operations or all fleet operators utilizing the same service, 2) federated with two different instances to model a scenario with two different fleet operators conducting digital operations, and 3) fully distributed with a different instance for each digital operation. In simulations in which recorded tracks for VFR and IFR operations were played back and digital operations were modeled that would nominally arrive at KAFW once every 20 minutes (given no conflict resolution maneuvers), there were one or fewer losses of separation (LOS) across the three conflict management configurations. The same result was seen in simulations in which digital operations would nominally arrive at KAFW once every 10 minutes. However, in simulations in which digital operations would nominally arrive at KAFW once every 5 minutes, the number of LOS ranged between six and ten. This highlights the need for follow-on research to investigate the extent to which additional capabilities for digital operations, such as complexity management and/or flow organization, may be needed.
digitally enabled cooperative operations, digital ↗
Digital Flight: A New Cooperative Operating Mode to Complement VFR and IFR
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Digital Flight↗
Digital Flight: A New Cooperative Operating Mode to Complement VFR and IFR
Digital Flight is a proposed new operating mode for all airspace users, complementing and adding to the existing operating modes of visual and instrument flight rules (VFR and IFR) and providing for cooperative integration in controlled airspace. Under new regulations (Digital Flight Rules, DFR) that set requirements for its sustained use, qualified operators employ Digital Flight to enhance their airspace access and operational flexibility in all visibility conditions and eventually all airspace classes without requiring segregation from incumbent operations. Enabled by connected digital information and technologies, Digital Flight operators employ cooperative practices and self-separation to ensure flight path safety in lieu of visual procedures or receiving separation services from Air Traffic Control. Its distributed structure and automated functions enable traffic densities and operational tempos not achievable with the existing operating modes. Various ongoing and emerging industry initiatives for enabling new entrants (e.g., unmanned aircraft systems, urban air taxis) and enhanced use of underserved airspace (e.g., ultra-high altitude), are pursuing various alternative operating modes with significant similarities, creating a unique and time-limited opportunity for harmonization and convergence. Digital Flight is proposed to serve that harmonizing role, creating a common new paradigm for airspace operations. Such convergence would not only bring together these emerging market segments but will also bolster the existing operators with access to this new operating mode and its advantages. Digital Flight provides an opportunity to focus regulatory development and benefit the aviation industry. This paper describes Digital Flight in sufficient detail to initiate community engagement and deliberation on a common new operating mode. It describes the essential elements, principal capabilities, and operational integration of DFR in shared airspace. It describes the value proposition from multiple perspectives and presents initial thoughts on the path forward.
Digital flight↗
Digital Flight: A New Cooperative Operating Mode to Complement VFR and IFR
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Digital flight↗
UAM Research – X4: Introduction to Community Based Rules (CBRs)
Recent advances in technology have enabled industry development of new and innovative vehicle types, offering lower operating costs and highly automated functionality that facilitates the introduction of new types of operations. These include low-altitude airspace operations with small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UASs), short distance urban and intercity operations, and high- altitude Upper Class E operations. These and other new operations are expected to result in a much higher operational tempo than is currently experienced across the National Airspace System (NAS). The projected increase in operations, as well as the introduction of new aircraft form factors and supporting technologies—including increasing autonomy—will present challenges to the existing Air Traffic Management (ATM) system, which is currently unable to cost-effectively scale and deliver needed services. In response to these challenges and opportunities, a highly automated, cooperative environment incorporating a federated network has been envisioned and described through multiple operational concepts, depicting the future operating environment as part of the NAS. Foundational to the success of this future operating environment is the establishment of common business rules and understandings across relevant stakeholders, referred to as Community Based Rules (CBRs). Development, adoption, and implementation of CBRs will require collaboration across multiple stakeholders, including operators, support services (industry), and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), to identify and resolve a broad range of questions and challenges. Examples of these questions include “what rules are needed?”, “how are they expressed?”, and “how will they be managed?” This document identifies and describes an initial set of questions and considerations to be examined as efforts begin to create the innovative, automated, cooperative operating environment of the future. The goal is to establish a common frame of reference to support discussions and decisions regarding the future implementation of CBRs as part of the NAS.
Community Based Rules↗
ETM: Upper Class E Traffic Management
The FAA, along with input from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and industry partners, published an initial Concept of Operations (ConOps) for Upper Class E Traffic Management (ETM). To support the next iteration of the ConOps, NASA Ames Research Center has been investigating several technologies and operating principles that will help enable industry in the system development of a cooperative operating environment. Following in the footsteps of the established Unmanned Aircraft Systems Traffic Management (UTM) concept, ETM will utilize some of the basic system architecture and the community-based theories of cooperation and coordination. The main considerations for ETM as compared to UTM, are the diversity of the vehicle types with varying speed and maneuverability capabilities, the severe stratospheric atmosphere conditions, the potential longevity of the missions, and the assorted operating modes (e.g., transit, loitering, or hovering). TM oriented technologies and proposed operating principles are being tested and assessed in a collaborative evaluation of an initial ETM system in spring of 2024. These slides will be presented to a group of stratospheric operators, informing them on some past work and the next steps in the ETM research.
Upper Class-E Traffic Management (ETM)↗
The Use of LANDSAT DCS and Imagery in Reservoir Management and Operation
The author has identified the following significant results. The demonstration, local user terminal, has proven the hypothesis that a relatively inexpensive, automatic, and easily maintained ground receiving station for satellite relayed data is practical for an operational use.
Cooper, S.↗