3rd ALIAS Conference Presentation 5-6 October 2015

2. The ANSP perspective
Fiesole – 5/10/2015
Maurizio Mancini

3. Past = One Man Show

4. Today = An hard work

5. Who manage Air Tfc in airspace?
The ANSP
What’s an ANSP?
Any public or private entity providing ANS for general air traffic, including an organisation
having applied for a certificate to provide such services. (Reg. EU 1035/2011).
What are ANS?
ATS, CNS, MET, AIS

6. What a flight means for an ANSP
VFR IFR
???

7. Airspace Classification & Rules
???

8. So far, ANSPs knows that the pilot is directly responsible

9. How is it going?
• “An Airbus A320's wing passed 6m (20ft) below a drone hovering at
Heathrow, said the Civil Aviation Authority” (http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-
33612631)
• “Six "near misses" between drones and piloted aircraft have been
recorded by the CAA” (http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-33612631)
• “Lufthansa plane in near miss with drone on Warsaw approach, the crew
of the Lufthansa Embraer ERJ-195 reported the near collision with the
drone at 2,500ft (760m) (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-33605869),
• “There have been more than 20 reported incidents involving unmanned
aircraft, or drones, since April last year in Singapore”
(http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/more-than-20-incidents/1839976.html)
• In US near misses in many international airports (New York La Guardia, Los
Angeles International, ecc..)
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2014/06/23/close-encounters-with-small-drones-on-
rise/)

10. Which is the ENAV’s role/liability, NOW?
C) AIR TRAFFIC SERVICES ARE NOT PROVIDED TO CIVIL RPA
D) INFORMATION REGARDING CIVIL RPA OPERATIONS AT OR BELOW 500FT AGL,
OUTSIDE ATZ, IS NOT AVAILABLE TO ATS UNITS
E) FROM SFC TO 500FT AGL, OUTSIDE ATZ, SEPARATION, TRAFFIC AVOIDANCE
ADVICE, TRAFFIC INFORMATION AND FLIGHT INFORMATION SERVICE ARE NOT
PROVIDED TO MANNED AIRCRAFT IN RESPECT OF CIVIL RPA
F) CIVIL RPA OPERATORS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR SEPARATION FROM ANY OTHER
AIRCRAFT AND SHALL GIVE RIGHT OF WAY AND LAND, OR DESCEND BELOW 25M
AGL, IN ORDER TO AVOID INTERFERENCE WITH OTHER AIRCRAFT

11. ANSPs current experience on UAS/RPAS
Operations
• ANSPs in some States have safely and
successfully integrated RPAS operations
outside segregated airspace.
• This has been achieved on a case by
case basis and universally applicable
procedures have not yet been
developed.
• Experience shows that safe integration
has been possible, but current RPAS do
not have the capability to operate
seamlessly with other air traffic.

12. The EASA UAS/RPAS proposed classification/approach

13. The EASA UAS/RPAS classification/approach

14. Future = Still unknown but shall be safer

15. Future = Still unknown but shall be safer

16. Integrated system
Procedure
Rules
Training
Common sense
SafetyMitigations
Number of drones Number of drones
$
Future = Still unknown but shall be safer

17. Drones or not Drones?
... or, alternatively, the question will soon become: “How we should integrate
the airlines operations in an airspace/world dominated by the drones?”
Are we going to answer to the question: “How we shall integrate drones
operations in the airlines airspace/world?”

18. Who can assure an acceptable level of
safety?
The new drone
swatter
OR

19. ANSPs approach on UAS/RPAS Integration
In general, to properly manage this issue ANSPs see two main distinguished (although not
black and white) streams/areas for UAS/RPAS integration:
• The so-called “Integration of UAS/RPAS in ATM”, i.e. in “CONTROLLED/NON-
SEGREGATED AIRSPACE”:
• This theme is addressed by the European ATM Master Plan.
• R&D related activities are performed under SESAR JU coordination.
• Ruling process is on-going at international level.
• The exponential growth of “small drones” (i.e. mainly within EASA “open” and
“specific” proposed categories) used for recreational or business purposes. Use is
mainly at Very Low Level Operations (VLL) generally taking place in “UNCONTROLLED
AIRSPACE”
• The second theme is not yet clearly addressed nor recognised in the European ATM
R&D Agenda

20. ANSPs approach on UAS/RPAS integration
• Much of the small UAS/RPAS
operations will be performed in
uncontrolled airspace and mostly at
VLL (Very Low Level) in the class F and
G airspace.
• In class F & G airspace no Air Traffic
Control Service is provided and the
integration of small UAS/RPAS could
potentially cause a degradation of the
existing safety level and thus require
the definition of innovative enabling
infrastructures and services.

21. ANSPs approach on UAS/RPAS integration
• Smart use of existing COM & SUR
technologies (ADS-B Out, Mobile
Broadband, Satellite communications
etc.) to support innovative cloud-based
services allowing a safe management of
UAS/RPAS Traffic Management
Operations (RITM) in class F and G with
respect to current users (e.g. General
Aviation etc.).
• Innovative operational services should
encompass the use of mission-related
segregated areas or corridors (geo-
fencing), security aspects in relation
with RPAS surveillance, electronic flight
plan treatment and broadcasting of
safety related information.

22. A lot of issues but at least a great pro:
we are all pilots!
Question?