Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “UAM Concept of Operations”

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 19 records

UAM Vision Concept of Operations (ConOps) UAM Maturity Level (UML) 4

This Vision ConOps is intended as a foundation to engage members of the UAM community and provide a consensus on the future vision of UAM operations. It provides a concept for more detailed discussion and a basis for the exploration of ideas using a common framework to inform the continued development and integration of UAM as part of the broader transportation system. Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) encompasses a range of innovative aviation technologies (small drones, electric aircraft, automated air traffic management, etc.) that are transforming aviation’s role in everyday life, including the movement of goods and people. Urban Air Mobility (UAM) represents one of the most exciting and complex AAM concepts with highly automated aircraft, providing commercial services to the public over densely populated cities. This concept has generated tremendous interest and industry investment. UAM envisages a future in which advanced technologies and new operational procedures enable practical, cost-effective air travel as an integral mode of transportation in metropolitan areas. It represents one of the most exciting and complex AAM concepts with highly automated aircraft providing commercial services to the public over densely populated cities. For this reason, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) selected UAM as the initial goal of its AAM efforts and the focus of this Vision Concept of Operations (ConOps) document. UAM Community Vision ConOps: This Vision ConOps effort was led by experts from NASA’s Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) in collaboration with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Deloitte’s Ecosystem Advisory Group (a cohort of advisers with aviation, aerospace, and regulatory expertise). To develop this Vision ConOps, NASA, FAA, and Deloitte built upon the current body of aeronautical research and consulted with more than 100 stakeholder organizations. This UAM community includes entities ranging from legacy aviation leaders to innovators and new market entrants. Stakeholders consulted included the federal government, state and local government, aerospace original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), local transportation organizations, prospective UAM operators, academia, industry standards-setting bodies, airports, service suppliers, and others (as described in Appendix G). This input was captured through the following methods: • A series of more than two dozen interviews with industry experts, federal regulators, state and local governments, and industry trade groups provided insight into the challenges of UAM integration into the National Airspace System (NAS), as well as technology developments and a variety of perspectives as to how UAM systems will integrate. • A series of two-day community workshops enabling active, detailed engagement of nearly 100 industry, academic, federal, and state stakeholder individuals. These workshops, hosted by NASA and Deloitte, explored UAM concepts in detail, and stakeholders were invited to collaboratively analyze and propose solutions to some of the greatest conceptual challenges behind UAM at an intermediate state. • A review of more than 160 sources of UAM literature from across government, industry, and academia, which are listed in Appendix H. • The public sharing of workshop input and document drafts for review and input across the UAM community. Feedback in the form of more than 1,000 comments and inputs on the document was received from industry groups, individual companies, academia, and government (federal, state, and local), among others. Although effort was made to incorporate inputs from across the UAM stakeholder group, not all comments could ultimately be incorporated in this version. The team resolved conflicting comments or ideas while maintaining consistency with the known direction of regulators and ensuring the document was coherent and consistent. It is recognized that this is a rapidly evolving area and that concepts will likely change over time; as such, this Vision ConOps is a living document and is expected to evolve as concepts mature. The ConOps does, however, provide a vision of UAM concepts and solutions based on the broad insights from across the UAM stakeholder community at the time of its publication and is intended to serve as a UAM North Star for continued research and development of UAM. As a broad Vision ConOps, is not a detailed engineering document; rather, it focuses primarily on outlining a broad, high-level vision across all aspects of a UAM transportation system.

Urban Air Mobility↗

Urban Air Mobility (UAM) Vision Concept of Operations (ConOps) UAM Maturity Level (UML)-4 Overview

The Vision ConOps is intended as a foundation to engage members of the UAM community and provide a consensus on the future vision of UAM operations. It provides a concept for more detailed discussion and a basis for the exploration of ideas using a common framework to inform the continued development and integration of UAM as part of the broader transportation system. Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) encompasses a range of innovative aviation technologies (small drones, electric aircraft, automated air traffic management, etc.) that are transforming aviation’s role in everyday life, including the movement of goods and people. Urban Air Mobility (UAM) represents one of the most exciting and complex AAM concepts with highly automated aircraft, providing commercial services to the public over densely populated cities.

Brian Hill↗

NASA’s Simulation Activities for Evaluating UAM Concept of Operations

NASA’s vision for Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) is to help emerging aviation markets to safely develop an air transportation system that moves people and cargo between places previously not served or underserved by aviation using revolutionary new aircraft types. Urban Air Mobility (UAM), the concept of expanding transportation networks by serving short flights to transport people and goods around metropolitan areas, is part of a larger paradigm shift toward AAM, in which new technologies and business models are enabling transformational applications of aviation. In NASA’s Concept of Operations for UAM, Providers of Services for UAM (PSU) play a key role to enable safe and efficient UAM operations by sharing operational data among UAM operators. PSUs provide a pre-departure strategic conflict management service that establishes operational plans for new flights and coordinates them with all relevant operations in shared airspace. The strategic conflict management aims to minimize the need for tactical separation provision, while considering anticipated traffic demand, vertiport capacity and availability, forecasted weather, and airspace restrictions. NASA is currently preparing a new lab evaluation activity with aviation industry partners, called the X4 simulation, to demonstrate their airspace services and capabilities and test new information exchange requirements for UAM operations. This simulation activity will support NASA’s National Campaign (NC) flight tests which are planned over the next several years to guide the collective community and stakeholders through a series of scenario-based test activities that involve vehicles and airspace management services operating in a live test environment. This presentation will provide an overview of the X4 simulation, including objectives, scenarios, assumptions, system architecture, and test schedule. The X4 simulation will evaluate the interconnectivity and operational intent sharing between PSUs for multiple operators, as well as the performance of strategic conflict management.

Urban Air Mobility, Simulation, Advanced Air Mobil↗

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↗

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↗

Assistive Detect and Avoid Technology in Urban Air Mobility Environments

The use of Assistive Detect and Avoid (Assistive DAA or ADAA) technology in Urban Air Mobility (UAM) environments poses potential benefits as well as challenges. Assistive DAA refers to the leveraged use of DAA technology, originally developed to replace see-and-avoid capabilities for remotely piloted aircraft, in onboard-piloted aircraft to augment (rather than replace) pilots’ see-and-avoid abilities and thus enhance the safety and efficiency of visual flight operations. ADAA is anticipated to be especially safety-enhancing in airspace where traffic density is high or traditional air traffic services are limited, such as in future UAM environments. ADAA may also enable higher-tempo UAM operations than with only see-and-avoid capabilities, while still maintaining acceptable levels of safety. UAM concepts under development by the FAA, NASA, and industry focus on operations moving people and cargo in urban and suburban areas using innovative technologies, operations, and aircraft, including electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft. Researchers at NASA Langley Research Center, in collaboration with FAA researchers at the William J. Hughes Technical Center in Atlantic City, NJ, have conducted a series of medium-fidelity, human-in-the-loop research simulations of potential future UAM operations and concepts in both Class C and Class B airspace environments. These simulations have included use of a Langley-developed ADAA research tool called DANTi, which enables configurable ADAA displays to be presented to pilots of simulated eVTOL aircraft participating in higher-density and higher-tempo UAM operations. Experience and observations made during testing of the NASA-developed DANTi ADAA capability in the UAM NFLITE simulation environment will be reported in this paper together with a discussion of airspace integration and regulatory topics.

Detect and Avoid↗

Assistive Detect and Avoid Technology in Urban Air Mobility Environments

The use of Assistive Detect and Avoid (Assistive DAA or ADAA) technology in Urban Air Mobility (UAM) environments poses potential benefits as well as challenges. Assistive DAA refers to the leveraged use of DAA technology, originally developed to replace see-and-avoid capabilities for remotely piloted aircraft, in onboard-piloted aircraft to augment (rather than replace) pilots’ see-and-avoid abilities and thus enhance the safety and efficiency of visual flight operations. ADAA is anticipated to be especially safety-enhancing in airspace where traffic density is high or traditional air traffic services are limited, such as in future UAM environments. ADAA may also enable higher-tempo UAM operations than with only see-and-avoid capabilities, while still maintaining acceptable levels of safety. UAM concepts under development by the FAA, NASA, and industry focus on operations moving people and cargo in urban and suburban areas using innovative technologies, operations, and aircraft, including electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft. Researchers at NASA Langley Research Center, in collaboration with FAA researchers at the William J. Hughes Technical Center in Atlantic City, NJ, have conducted a series of medium-fidelity, human-in-the-loop research simulations of potential future UAM operations and concepts in both Class C and Class B airspace environments. These simulations have included use of a Langley-developed ADAA research tool called DANTi, which enables configurable ADAA displays to be presented to pilots of simulated eVTOL aircraft participating in higher-density and higher-tempo UAM operations. Experience and observations made during testing of the NASA-developed DANTi ADAA capability in the UAM NFLITE simulation environment will be reported in this paper together with a discussion of airspace integration and regulatory topics.

Detect and Avoid↗

Simulated Evaluation of Strategic Conflict Management Capabilities for Urban Air Mobility Operations

Urban Air Mobility (UAM) is a new air transportation service concept to carry passengers or cargo in metropolitan areas, leveraged by innovative aircraft and automation technologies. NASA has conducted a series of simulations to evaluate the UAM concept of operations and inform the development of airspace procedures and services for UAM operations. The latest set of simulations called “X5” were conducted to test a Provider of Services for UAM (PSU) prototype that NASA developed for UAM flight planning, strategic conflict management support, and data exchange between UAM operators. In these simulations, two strategic conflict management capabilities, Demand-Capacity Balancing (DCB) and Sequencing and Scheduling (S&S), were further investigated. This paper describes the system architecture designed for the X5 simulation activities, the sequence diagram for strategic conflict management, and the simulation environment in the Dallas/Fort Worth urban area. The simulation results based on several system performance metrics for evaluation show that a sequential application of DCB and S&S effectively works to distribute traffic demand and meet sequencing and spacing criteria by assigning ground delays, compared to the DCB only and S&S only cases.

Urban Air Mobility, Strategic Conflict Management,↗

Simulated Evaluation of Strategic Conflict Management Capabilities for Urban Air Mobility Operations

Urban Air Mobility (UAM) is a new air transportation service concept to carry passengers or cargo in metropolitan areas, leveraged by innovative aircraft and automation technologies. NASA has conducted a series of simulations to evaluate the UAM concept of operations and inform the development of airspace procedures and services for UAM operations. The latest set of simulations called “X5” were conducted to test a Provider of Services for UAM (PSU) prototype that NASA developed for UAM flight planning, strategic conflict management support, and data exchange between UAM operators. In these simulations, two strategic conflict management capabilities, Demand-Capacity Balancing (DCB) and Sequencing and Scheduling (S&S), were further investigated. This paper describes the system architecture designed for the X5 simulation activities, the sequence diagram for strategic conflict management, and the simulation environment in the Dallas/Fort Worth urban area. The simulation results based on several system performance metrics for evaluation show that a sequential application of DCB and S&S effectively works to distribute traffic demand and meet sequencing and spacing criteria by assigning ground delays, compared to the DCB only and S&S only cases.

Simulation↗

Design and Analysis of Corridors for UAM Operations

Urban Air Mobility (UAM) is predicted to provide alternate modes of transportation for cargo and passengers in the urban areas. Integration of UAM operations into the National Airspace System is a challenge especially around large airport. The Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) UAM Concept of Operations (ConOps) suggests new airspace structures for UAM operations such as corridors where FAA air traffic control (ATC) will not be expected to provide services. This paper presents a design for corridors in the Dallas Fort Worth (DFW) area that attempts to minimize air traffic controller interactions with UAM pilots and operators. The corridor and vertiports are then analyzed with respect to Class B separation criteria and wake advisory criteria. The results show that for the corridors designed for the DFW area and presented in this research, in some cases Class B separation criteria are not available between UAM corridors and legacy traffic due to the geometry of the airport. It shows that wake advisory criteria were not met for some segments in North Flow traffic but were generally met in South Flow. This means that some corridor segments at DFW airport will not be available for a given airport flow and may need new placements, which need further investigation.

Urban Air Mobility↗

National Campaign (NC)-1 Strategic Conflict Management Simulation (X4) Final Report

Urban Air Mobility (UAM) enables highly automated, cooperative, passenger or cargo-carrying air transportation services in and around urban areas. UAM is a subset of the Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) concept under development by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and industry. The Strategic Conflict Management (SCM) Simulation, dubbed “X4”, was conducted between July 2021 and June 2022 by NASA with the FAA and industry to evolve the Provider of Services for UAM (PSU) that will be needed to ensure initial UAM operations can scale in the National Airspace System (NAS). The FAA UAM Concept of Operations (ConOps) v1 [1] served as an initial guiding document for the X4 airspace management system design to ensure the architecture supports testing of services provided by third-party service providers. To that end, the X4 architecture leveraged concepts and technologies developed for Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM) while also developing and testing new capabilities and services needed for UAM. The architecture included an initial prototype of the FAA-Industry Exchange Protocol (FIDXP), third-party services such as the PSUs, and Discovery and Synchronization Service (DSS), and other new services such as Demand-Capacity Balancing (DCB) to facilitate UAM strategic conflict management. During X4, NASA led discussions and collaborated with seven industry airspace partners to develop initial airspace management concepts for UAM that drove what would be tested and evaluated during the simulations. The initial capabilities defined for PSU leveraged UTM UAS Service Supplier (USS) as a starting point and evolved to meet UAM requirements. These discussions were also an opportunity for NASA to collaborate with industry to develop a set of initial Community-Based Rules (CBRs). These CBRs enabled how UAM traffic would be cooperatively managed among UAM operators. The collaborative, iterative process of developing CBRs with industry during X4 provided insight into the challenges involved and identified the need for a suitable and effective forum for future CBR development. In parallel with these discussions, NASA conducted a series of seven software sprints and two collaborative simulations with the airspace partners that built up in complexity. Over the course of the year, all seven partners successfully completed all the sprints by demonstrating the required capabilities. They also participated in the two collaborative simulations to demonstrate how multiple PSUs could work together in a collaborative, more complex environment with higher traffic density. The X4 simulation accomplished NASA's objectives and helped advance the development of the seven participating PSUs. The lessons learned provided insight into key elements of the UAM Notional Architecture from the FAA ConOps v1 [1] and UTM technologies when applied to UAM: - Having a Concept of Use (ConUse) defined prior to the activity would accelerate the time and effort from concept development to testing. - While the UAM Notional Architecture provided a starting point for a federated architecture that support services provided by third-party providers, the USS and PSU differed in their capability definitions for operational intent submission and sharing, conformance monitoring, airspace authorization, strategic conflict management, airspace constraints and dynamic replanning. - While existing DSS developed for UTM provided a way for PSU and other UAM services (such as DCB) to discover relevant operations from each other, additional complexity and challenges were found during X4 testing and illuminated the need for a more suitable solution for UAM. Industry can leverage the results of this demonstration to accelerate UAM requirements, CBRs, and standards development. The FAA and other government municipalities and agencies will be able to leverage results to inform future policies and identify additional gaps that require further analysis, moving toward operationalization of UAM.

Urban Air Mobility↗

Operational Integration Assessment (OIA) of Midterm UAM Operations: Class C Airspace Tabletop Exercise and Integration Checkpoint

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), in collaboration with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), is conducting research into evolving today’s air traffic management system towards a more automated and operationally flexible airspace to accommodate Urban Air Mobility (UAM) operations at scale. UAM operations, enabled by electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing (eVTOL) aircraft, may change the role of aviation in the movement of people and goods and provide practical, cost-effective air transport in metropolitan areas. FAA UAM Concept of Operations v2.0 describes three evolutionary stages of UAM operations: Initial, Midterm, and Mature State operations. Midterm operations are comprised of many complex changes to the national airspace system (NAS). The Operational Integration Assessment (OIA) was created as a capability to address the need to study the progression and identify interdependencies of those changes that may occur during the midterm UAM operations timeframe. The OIA includes a series of tabletop exercises and integration checkpoints planned to explore various use cases from end-to-end, evaluated by NASA’s Air Traffic Management eXploration (ATM-X) project in partnership with the FAA’s William J. Hughes Technical Center (WJHTC) and industry partners. The use cases were exercised in an immersive, integrated live-virtual-constructive (LVC) airspace simulation environment, called the NASA/FAA Laboratory Integrated Test Environment (NFLITE), as part of an effort to learn how UAM operations can scale beyond the as-is NAS and through the transition to higher-tempo and highly automated operations of the future. This document describes the events of the tabletop exercise held from January 24-26, 2023, at the National Airspace Research & Technology Park (NARTP) in Egg Harbor Township, New Jersey, adjacent to the WJHTC and the subsequent integration checkpoint performed on March 28, 2023,at NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC) in Hampton, Virginia.

UAM↗

Optimizing Urban Air Mobility Research Through Bi-Directional Integration Processes for Effective Verification and Validation

Urban Air Mobility (UAM), a subset of Advanced Air Mobility (AAM), aims to revolutionize metropolitan transportation. This paper explores an engineering process framework within National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)’s Air Mobility Pathfinders (AMP) project, which is focused on the safe scaling and seamless integration of UAM operations within the National Airspace System (NAS). Progressing through three phases — Initial, Midterm, and Mature — the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)’s UAM Concept of Operations (ConOps) describes a proposed path for the evolution of UAM operations, presenting multifaceted challenges in technology, regulation, and stakeholder engagement. With this ConOps as a basis, the AMP project is executing research, development, test, and evaluation activities aimed at delivering validated reference architectures for the Midterm phase. This paper illuminates the pivotal role of the systems engineering process in managing these technical efforts. Robust verification and validation methods, along with systematic bi-directional integration process, enhance the ability to conduct research into the design and evolution of safe, efficient, and reliable UAM systems. In this paper a systematic framework will be presented and shown to facilitate interactions between UAM stakeholders and to effectively manage the complex architecture of UAM operations in the NAS.

National Airspace System↗

Collaborative Weather Research and Development for Urban Air Mobility

NASA recently collaborated with National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) and AvMet Application Inc. to identify the weather information, existing aviation weather products, and the novel approaches that are required to model and mitigate various impacts of uncertain atmospheric conditions to support safe and efficient Urban Air Mobility (UAM) operations. This presentation will provide updates on the collaborative efforts of weather impacts modelling and analysis for future evaluation of UAM concepts of operations in the presence of weather.

Urban Air Mobility↗

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↗

Demand Forecast Model Development and Scenarios Generation For Urban Air Mobility Concepts

The purpose of this project is to estimate the demand for various Urban Air Mobility Concepts (UAM) of Operations and to generate scenarios for use in analysis and simulations. The demand forecast model, previously developed under NASA/NIA Contract No: NNL13AA08B; Task Order No: NNL16AA36T, for an urban on-demand air-taxi commuter concept is the basis for this work.

M. Rimjha↗

Demand Capacity Balancing at Vertiports for Initial Strategic Conflict Management of Urban Air Mobility Operations

Urban Air Mobility (UAM) is a new transportation concept that enables highly automated, cooperative, passenger or cargo-carrying air transportation services in and around urban areas. To achieve the high level of operational density and complexity desired by the UAM community, an airspace system that allows UAM operators to readily access and operate safely and efficiently in the airspace is needed. This airspace system will require air traffic management designed to reduce the risk of conflicts and loss of separation between UAM flights. In general, strategic conflict management is considered as the first layer of conflict management for safe flight operations to condition the traffic to reduce the need for airborne separation provision, the second layer of conflict management. Demand Capacity Balancing (DCB) is one of the concept components to achieve strategic conflict management. DCB strategically evaluates traffic demand and resource capacities to allow UAM operators to determine when, where and how they operate, while mitigating conflicting needs for airspace and vertiport capacity. DCB can be applied whenever UAM demand exceeds the capacity in airspace or at vertiports. As the UAM ecosystem evolves with advanced technologies and matured operational procedures, more complicated conflict management will likely be needed. In the current UAM ‘Concept of Operation (ConOps) 1.0’ operational stage defined by FAA, however, it will be meaningful to explore the demand capacity balancing at vertiports only, as an initial strategic conflict management approach for UAM operations because vertiport capacity seems to be a bottleneck of UAM traffic. For this research, we developed a demand-capacity imbalance detection and resolution service for UAM. This DCB service identifies the demand from operators and compares the demand to a given capacity at the shared resources (i.e., vertiports) over the upcoming time horizon which is divided into time bins having a constant interval. When a new flight plan is submitted, the algorithm embedded in the DCB service checks the available time bins based on the desired departure time and estimated arrival time at origin and destination vertiports, respectively. If the time bins for the originally desired times are already occupied by other flights (i.e., demand is at or above capacity), the algorithm finds the next available time bins for takeoff and landing and shifts the conflicting departure time to the earliest time that satisfies the capacity constraints at both origin and destination vertiports. The details of the algorithm will be described in the final manuscript. Figure 1 shows that the proposed DCB algorithm works well for a sample traffic scenario. In this example, a total of 144 flights, split between two operators, are planned over 2 hours, traveling 10 routes between five vertiports. In the heatmaps, the horizontal axis shows 12 time bins where each bin represents a 12-minute interval, and the vertical axis shows five vertiports. The number in each cell shows the number of operations, counting both departures and arrivals, at a specific vertiport in each time bin. For the given capacity of 2 operations/vertiport/bin, Figure 1 shows that the original demand sometimes exceeds the capacity, but the modified demand is reduced to the given capacity after resolving demand-capacity imbalances. When UAM flights are operated, it is expected that many practical issues would arise in the federated system architecture with multiple operators. UAM operators may experience a time synchronization issue due to communication delay between operator and vehicle. UAM vehicles would fly at different flight speeds, depending on vehicle models. Actual departure and arrival times can have large variations, compared to the schedule. The lead time from flight plan submission to desired departure time can vary by service type (e.g., regular shuttle service vs. on-demand service). Using the proposed DCB algorithm, we also investigated how the actual flight schedule and DCB performance are affected by these uncertainties such as unsynchronized times between operators, flight speed differences, lead time differences, and departure time errors. The final manuscript will include the background of this research work, the description of the DCB algorithm and its use cases with traffic scenarios. It will also provide the analytical results about the impact of various uncertainties that can occur in actual UAM operations on the DCB at vertiports, in terms of demand distribution changes, number of simultaneous operations, and delay propagation.

Urban Air Mobility↗