Joint JAA/EUROCONTROL Task-Force on UAVs Presentation at RST 03/4 Yves Morier JAA Regulation Director
OUTLINE OF THE PRESENTATION • What are JAA and EASA • What is EUROCONTROL? • Why a joint Task-force? • Assumptions • The Terms of Reference of the Task-Force. • Task-Force discussions items • Organisation of the Task-Force • The first draft of the report and some selected issues • State of play/Next steps. • Conclusion
What are the JAA and EASA? • The JAA are a co-operative body forAviation Safety of 37 Member Authorities • Scope: • Design & manufacture; Operations and Maintenance of Aircraft. • Licensing of Flight Crew Personnel. • The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) operational on 28.09.03 is a EU Agency for 15 Member States • Scope: • Design & manufacture and Maintenance of Aircraft.
What is EUROCONTROL ? • The European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation: 31 Member States have signed the revised Convention . • Scope: ATM “gate to gate” • Future perspective: The 4 draft “SingleSky Regulations”.
Co-operation JAA/EUROCONTROL • Agreement for Co-operation (1996): • Provide a working basis to work together on CNS/ATM issues • Ensure that aircraft airworthiness and operational requirements are co-ordinated with airspace and ATM developments
Why a joint Task-Force ? • A joint Task-force is justified by the close relation between ATM issues and Aircraft issues in the case of UAVs. • The need for regulatory work was identified both within JAA and EUROCONTROL
Assumptions • Should allow for take-off and landing at “normal” airports and use of “normal” airspace. • Should accommodate UAVs of various size & with different levels of technology • Should accommodate various kinds of operations
Terms of Reference (1) • Develop a concept for UAV regulations: • Design & Manufacture and Maintenance of UAVs. • Operations of UAVs (in particular approval of operators) • Licensing of UAVs personnel. • Rules of the Air • Security issues • Concept ? • Outline and guiding principles for regulations • Not draft regulations !
Terms of Reference (2) • Objective of regulating UAVs: • To protect third parties, airborne and on the ground • Not address mission failure.
Terms of reference (6) • Deliverables: • A concept with its justification and recommendations for future work • Time scales: • Report originally planned for September 2003 however extension until February 2004 agreed. • More details on the Terms of Reference can be found in Attachment 1 to this presentation.
Categorisation of the Task-Force discussion items (1) • General • ICAO • Airworthiness and continued airworthiness • Environment
Categorisation of the Task-Force discussion items (2) • Operation; Maintenance and Licensing. • Air Traffic Management • Security • More details on these discussion items can be found in Attachment 2 to this presentation.
Organisation of the UAV Task-Force • Sub-group I: General, Safety and Security • Sub-group II: Airworthiness & Continued Airworthiness and Environment • Sub-group III: Operations, Maintenance and Licensing • ATM and ICAO to be handled within the EUROCONTROL system. A two-way dialogue exists with the UAV Task-Force
The first draft of the report and some selected issues • The Draft report consists of: • An executive summary: TBD • 7 Chapters • 15 annexes or Appendices (today) • A detailed outline can be found in Attachment 3 to this presentation
The first draft of the report and some selected issues • Definitions of: • UAV and UAV system • UAV Operator and UAV Commander • Safety Case and detailed codes: • Safety Case only? • Detailed codes only? • Safety Cases and detailed codes?
The first draft of the report and some selected issues • Two techniques to establish applicable design standard: • Kinetic energy of the Air Vehicle • Safety objectives: Ground victim criterion; kinetic energy; lethal surface; population density • Emergency Procedures and Flight Termination Systems:
State of Play/Next Steps • First draft has been circulated to the Task-Force, and for “advance reactions” to Central JAA and within EUROCONTROL. • Comments will be reviewed by the Task-Force “leadership” on November 20-21 resulting in a second draft. • Second draft reviewed by the Plenary Task Force on December 10-11 resulting in a third draft
State of Play/Next Steps • Third draft “formally” consulted between 19.12.03 and 30.01.04: JAA Sectorial Teams; EUROCONTROL; Others? • Review of Comments by the Task-Force “leadership”: two days in week 7 (9-13.02.04); agreement by the Plenary task-Force on the third day • Transmission of “Final” report mid-week 8 to JAA and EUROCONTROL management for approval (Late February-early March)
State of Play/Next Steps • Transmission of “Final” report mid-week 8 to JAA and EUROCONTROL management for approval (Late February-early March) • More details on the process can be found in Attachment 4 to this presentation
Conclusion • Broad scope of work. • A lot of enthusiasm led to good progress! • More efforts needed to truly achieve the concept for UAV Regulations • Final Report should be available in March 2004 • Final Report will be used by EASA and/or JAA and EUROCONTROL as appropriate.
End of the presentation • Thank you very much for your attention! • Your comments/reactions are welcome!
Attachment 1 • More details on the Terms of Reference
Terms of Reference (3) • Concept to be based on: • An identification of the various UAV technologies and an identification of possible use. • Consider the creation of categories • Identify lower mass limit for regulation at European level • Review existing material (Existing or draft standards; Research studies) • Consider the use of a total system approach
Terms of Reference (4) • Particular attention to: • Approval of operator issues • Legal issues in relation to ICAO Convention Article 8 • Terminology issues
Terms of Reference (5) • Composition of the Task-Force: • In accordance with JAR-11(JAA Regulatory and Related Procedures): in addition to our classical list, organisations that can contribute have been invited. • In accordance with EUROCONTROLrequirements for Stakeholders involvement.
Attachment 2 • More details on the discussions items included in the scope of the Task-Force
General • Scope issues: • Minimum weight • All categories of Airspace • Applicability to State UAVs • Need to focus ? and how ? • Persons on board ? • Categorisation
General • Overall objective of regulating UAVs • Safety Objectives; Safety Targets. • Interaction with EASA • Top-down integrated approach • Safety assessments
General • Terminology • Definition of UAV system: • ground component also ? • Levels of automation/Autonomy • Performance • Others: • Flight Termination System • Automated Vehicle Control Station
ICAO • ICAO Convention Article 8 issue • Sense & Avoid/See & Avoid • Aircraft type Designators • Aircraft markings
Airworthiness & Continued Airworthiness • Definition of airworthiness for UAV • How to define Airworthiness requirements? • Kinetic energy criteria to select an existing code for a given project and then adapt • Using a lethality criteria create UAV codes based on JAR-VLA,-23,-25 but with different weight limits • Essential requirements • For specific cases, restricted certificates with operational limitations • Tailoring of existing codes; • Others?
Airworthiness & Continued Airworthiness • Certification or other approaches. • Self-Certification • Third party certification by accredited bodies • Credit for Flight Termination systems • Continuing airworthiness issues ?
Environment • Noise and emissions • Requirements • Frequencies for vehicle control • Public acceptance
Operations, Maintenance & Licensing • Operators organisation approval • Standard Operating Procedures • multiple operations by one pilot • Requirements competence • Licensing (Including medical) • Terrain Avoidance • Harmonisation with States UAV • Definitions: • UAV Commander • UAV pilot
Air Traffic Management • Communications architecture • Guiding principles for Air Traffic Management • Sense and Avoid issue • Equipment • Standard Operating Procedures • Relationships with EUROCONTROL
Security • Established Security level • Retention of control by Operator • Deployment and self destruct • Interference with ATM • Control of sales* • Physical security of ground-stations* * : not within aviation authorities remit
Attachment 3 • Detailed outline of the draft report
Outline of the Draft report (1) • 0)Executive Summary: TBD • 1)Introductory Information: • 1.1 Current regulatory Environment • 1.2 Future UAV Applications • 1.3 Background to the Task-force • 2)General Safety and Security: • 2.1 System Approach to Regulatory Determination • 2.2 UAV System Principles and Terminology • 2.3 Safety: TBD • 2.4 Security • 2.5 Communications, Command and Control
Outline of the Draft report (2) • 3) Airworthiness, Continued Airworthiness and Environment: • 3.1 Scope/Introduction • 3.2 Definitions • 3.3 Involved organisations: TBD • 3.4 UAV systems components to be certified • 3.5 Survey of existing UAV regulatory material • 3.6 Type of regulation approach and certification levels • 3.7 Continued Airworthiness issues • 3.8 Environment • 3.9 Major Technical issues • 3.10 Conclusions and recommendations: TBD
Outline of the Draft report (3) • 4)Operations, Maintenance & Licensing: • 4.1 Methodology • 4.2 Topics: • Collision Avoidance • Equipment • Licences and Rating • Emergency procedures • Operator certification • Responsibilities and Hand-over • Others
Outline of the Draft report (4) • 5)Air Traffic Management: • 5.1 Current situation in ATM • 5.2 Summary on T-F identified ATM issues. • 6)Conclusions: TBD • 7)Recommendations: TBD
Outline of the Draft report (5) • Annexes: • UAV Task-Force Terms of Reference • List of Participants and Contributors • WG I; II; III Terms of Reference • Other organisations involved in Aviation regulations • Future UAV applications
Outline of the Draft report (6) • Appendices: • Principles for the approach to regulatory determination • Safety • UAV categorisation. • Light UAV systems. • Draft proposal to amend EASA regulation • Impact energy method for establishing design standards • UAV safety objectives method for establishing design standards • Identification of subjects (WGIII) • Discussion of subjects (WG III) • Licenses and ratings.
Attachment 4 • Detailed process leading to final report
Task-Force Internal process • Confirm format of report and leaders on each Paragraph/ sub-paragraph of the first draft report: September 4. Done • Leaders to provide their input to Central JAA (CJAA): September 30. Done • First Draft report distributed to all task-force members: October 7. Done • Comments from all to leaders with copy to CJAA: November 7. Particular attention to interfaces issues
Task-Force Internal process • Meeting of Task-Force leadership to produce second draft report: 20-21 November • Second draft report sent to all Task Force members: November 28 • Agreement on third draft report: Plenary Task-Force meeting: two days in week 50 (10-11 December)
Outside consultations before presentation to JAA & EUROCONTROL Management • First draft sent to Central JAA Divisions for advance reactions: October 7. One day Meeting Task- Force leadership? with them week 45 (7 November) to gather reactions. • Advance reactions in EUROCONTROL before November 14 for SRC; Others in EUROCONTROL? • Other advance reactions?
Outside consultations before presentation to JAA & EUROCONTROL Management • “Formal” outside consultation by JAA on third draft report Division/ Sectorial teams; EUROCONTROL system; Others?: December 19. (With copy to all task-force members) • Comments from “outside” consultation January 30, 2004. • Review of comments by Task Force leadership: two days in week 7 (February 9-13); agreement by the Plenary Task-Force on the third day
Presentation to JAA & EUROCONTROL Management • Transmission to JAAC mid-week 8 should allow to present the report to JAAC on 24.02.04 • Transmission to EUROCONTROL SRC for approval mid-week 8 in view of approval late February/early March 2004
Attachment 5 • Safety Case Considerations