showing elos for the vusil concept toshowing elos for … · showing elos for the vusil concept...
TRANSCRIPT
Showing ELOS for the VUSIL concept toShowing ELOS for the VUSIL concept to integrate UAS in uncontrolled airspace
Presentation at 3rd EU UAS Workshop, 19 October 2011
Andreas Udovic, Hans de Jong and Jürgen Vielhauer (DFS)
3rd EU UAS Workshop – Showing ELOS for VUSIL integration conceptPresentation_DFS_3rd_EU_UAS_Workshop_20111019_V01.pptx Page 1 of 20
Contents
Participants in VUSIL II VUSIL concept Traffic display and Sense and Avoid display
In ol ed aircraft Involved aircraft
Example of a flight track and of conflict analysisExample of a flight track and of conflict analysis Results of analysis of all conflicts
Approach to safety analysis Assumptions and example of conservative approach Results for manned aircraft from literature Results for manned aircraft from literature Results for unmanned aircraft from VUSIL flight trials Comparison and conclusions
3rd EU UAS Workshop – Showing ELOS for VUSIL integration conceptPresentation_DFS_3rd_EU_UAS_Workshop_20111019_V01.pptx Page 2 of 20
p
Participants in VUSIL II
Contracting body: German Federal Police (Bundespolizei)
Project partners Project partners: DFS Deutsche Flugsicherung GmbH (DFS) Federal Office of Defence Technology and Procurement (BWB)Federal Office of Defence Technology and Procurement (BWB) ESG (System and Software company; developed Sense and Avoid
Functionality (SAAFu)) EMT (manufacturer of fixed wing UAS “Luna”) SWISS UAV (manufacturer of unmanned helicopter “Neo”)
German Aerospace Centre (DLR): German Aerospace Centre (DLR):• Institute of Flight Guidance (Braunschweig)• Institute of Flight Psychology (Hamburg)
3rd EU UAS Workshop – Showing ELOS for VUSIL integration conceptPresentation_DFS_3rd_EU_UAS_Workshop_20111019_V01.pptx Page 3 of 20
g y gy ( g)
VUSIL concept
UAS data link
Traffic display andSAAFu
Radar coverageby DFS
UASground station
Communication with ATC (FIS)
Mission profile
3rd EU UAS Workshop – Showing ELOS for VUSIL integration conceptPresentation_DFS_3rd_EU_UAS_Workshop_20111019_V01.pptx Page 4 of 20
Communication with ATC (FIS)
VUSIL concept
Concept elements:
All traffic must be equipped with transponder (e.g. as in TMZ)
100% radar coverage (by DFS)
Separation minima: 0.5NM horizontal and/or 500ft vertical
If possible, collision avoidance based on existing VFR rules
Traffic display in control station Traffic display in control station
Sense and Avoid assistance system
3rd EU UAS Workshop – Showing ELOS for VUSIL integration conceptPresentation_DFS_3rd_EU_UAS_Workshop_20111019_V01.pptx Page 5 of 20
y
Traffic display and Sense and Avoid display
Sense and Avoid display,developed by ESG
Traffic display,based on DFS Phoenix
3rd EU UAS Workshop – Showing ELOS for VUSIL integration conceptPresentation_DFS_3rd_EU_UAS_Workshop_20111019_V01.pptx Page 6 of 20
Involved aircraft
Eurocopter 135 (Intruder)
Luna
3rd EU UAS Workshop – Showing ELOS for VUSIL integration conceptPresentation_DFS_3rd_EU_UAS_Workshop_20111019_V01.pptx Page 7 of 20
Neo S-300
Example of a flight track
red: UAS Lunared: UAS Lunawhite: intruder
3rd EU UAS Workshop – Showing ELOS for VUSIL integration conceptPresentation_DFS_3rd_EU_UAS_Workshop_20111019_V01.pptx Page 8 of 20
Example of conflict analysis
VUSIL flight tracks – Flight No. 07, Conflict 13
Conflict distanceVUSIL separations – Flight No. 07, Conflict 13
Flight tracks
3rd EU UAS Workshop – Showing ELOS for VUSIL integration conceptPresentation_DFS_3rd_EU_UAS_Workshop_20111019_V01.pptx Page 9 of 20
Results of analysis of all Luna conflicts
No Flight Conflict No Real Extr Delta No Flight Conflict No Real Extr DeltaNo. Flight Conflict No. Real Extr. Delta
1 14 8 1.18 0.00 1.18 2 7 14 1.43 0.04 1.39 3 15 9 0 65 0 05 0 60
No. Flight Conflict No. Real Extr. Delta
12 11 2 0.71 0.25 0.46
13 6 7 0.37* 0.30 0.07
2 02 0 3 683 15 9 0.65 0.05 0.60 4 5 10 1.27 0.05 1.22 5 15 13 1.22 0.11 1.11
14 11 4 2.02 0.34 1.68
15 6 9 1.18 0.36 0.82
16 8 7 0.68 0.38 0.30
6 7 15 1.42 0.16 1.26 7 14 10 0.66 0.21 0.45 8 15 12 0.71 0.21 0.50
17 6 2 0.89 0.39 0.50
18 6 11 1.01 0.42 0.59
19 8 4 1.57 0.46 1.11
9 14 1 0.62 0.22 0.40 10 11 8 1.79 0.22 1.57 11 8 5 1.42 0.23 1.19
20 15 11 0.56 0.47 0.09
21 5 8 1.89 0.47 1.42
22 7 13 0.96 0.48 0.48
* Due to technical problem (frozen SAAFu), RPA pilot had wrong information about position of intruder
3rd EU UAS Workshop – Showing ELOS for VUSIL integration conceptPresentation_DFS_3rd_EU_UAS_Workshop_20111019_V01.pptx Page 10 of 20
Results of analysis of all Neo conflicts
No Flight Conflict No Real Extr DeltaNo. Flight Conflict No. Real Extr. Delta23 9 4 0.47 0.31 0.1624 12 3 0.87 0.35 0.5225 9 3 0 50 0 37 0 1325 9 3 0.50 0.37 0.1326 15 2 0.56 0.43 0.1327 II.15 7 1.41 0.20 1.21
3rd EU UAS Workshop – Showing ELOS for VUSIL integration conceptPresentation_DFS_3rd_EU_UAS_Workshop_20111019_V01.pptx Page 11 of 20
Approach to safety analysis
In order to concretise and investigate Equivalent Level of Safety,decompose Sense and Avoid and See and Avoid into sub processes: detection of traffic in the vicinity and
recognition and resol tion of conflicts recognition and resolution of conflicts,and estimate effectiveness of sub processes in terms of (conditional) probabilities, multiply and compare…probabilities, multiply and compare…
Effectiveness of “Sense and Avoid”
Effectiveness of conflict recognition×Effectiveness of traffic detection in %Effectiveness of conflict recognition and resolution in %
×
Effectiveness of traffic detection in %Effectiveness of conflict recognition and resolution in %
Eff ti f “S d A id”
×
3rd EU UAS Workshop – Showing ELOS for VUSIL integration conceptPresentation_DFS_3rd_EU_UAS_Workshop_20111019_V01.pptx Page 12 of 20
Effectiveness of “See and Avoid”
Assumptions
1. Equipment (e.g. Sense and Avoid display) performs as may be expected from operationally used equipment. Trials affected by equipment failures that would be “rare” in operational context are disregardeddisregarded
2. Manned flights are conducted by single pilots, which is not2. Manned flights are conducted by single pilots, which is not unusual for VFR flights
3. For the rest the comparison between Sense and Avoid and See and Avoid has been made in a conservative manner:
pessimistic for Sense and Avoid pessimistic for Sense and Avoid optimistic for See and Avoid
3rd EU UAS Workshop – Showing ELOS for VUSIL integration conceptPresentation_DFS_3rd_EU_UAS_Workshop_20111019_V01.pptx Page 13 of 20
Example of conservative approach
compared to
M d i ft R ti i ft Manned aircraft Reacting aircraft
Unmanned aircraft Non-reacting aircraft
3rd EU UAS Workshop – Showing ELOS for VUSIL integration conceptPresentation_DFS_3rd_EU_UAS_Workshop_20111019_V01.pptx Page 14 of 20
Results for manned aircraft
Unalerted Air-to-Air Visual Acquisition, JW Andrews, Lincoln Laboratory, MIT, 1991: Flight tests with 24 “test” pilots in Beech 33 (not aware that they
ere obser ed regarding traffic detection)were observed regarding traffic detection)
During each flight three encounters planned with Cessna 421During each flight three encounters planned with Cessna 421
Encounters within 60° left – 60° right and 10° up – 10° down 500 ft vertical separation for safety
Safety pilot in Beech noting time at which test pilot detects Cessna Safety pilot in Beech noting time at which test pilot detects Cessna
Result: 36 of 64 encounters were timely detected by “test” pilot – 56%
3rd EU UAS Workshop – Showing ELOS for VUSIL integration conceptPresentation_DFS_3rd_EU_UAS_Workshop_20111019_V01.pptx Page 15 of 20
y y p %
Results for manned aircraft
120° angle from aircraft 1120 angle from aircraft 1
120° angle from aircraft 1
v1
1 Collision point
Aircraft 1
v22
Aircraft 2
3rd EU UAS Workshop – Showing ELOS for VUSIL integration conceptPresentation_DFS_3rd_EU_UAS_Workshop_20111019_V01.pptx Page 16 of 20
Results for manned aircraft
2 8
3
° ° °
v=v2/v1
2 2
2,4
2,6
2,8 1>60° 1=60° 1<60°
1,6
1,8
2
2,2
1
1,2
1,4
,
0,4
0,6
0,82<60°
2=60°
0
0,2
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180
2>60°
3rd EU UAS Workshop – Showing ELOS for VUSIL integration conceptPresentation_DFS_3rd_EU_UAS_Workshop_20111019_V01.pptx Page 17 of 20
Results for manned aircraft
Optimistically assuming that
the conflict geometry is such that pilots of both aircraft could see each other in aforementioned angles andeach other in aforementioned angles and
the events that pilot of aircraft 1 sees aircraft 2 is independent from pilot of aircraft 2 sees aircraft 1,pilot of aircraft 2 sees aircraft 1,
the overall probability of timely detection is (1 - 0.56)2 0.8
It is optimistically assumed pilots always successfully recognise and resolve a conflict provided they have detected the conflict partnerresolve a conflict, provided they have detected the conflict partner
Effectiveness of See and Avoid is optimistically estimated at 80%
3rd EU UAS Workshop – Showing ELOS for VUSIL integration conceptPresentation_DFS_3rd_EU_UAS_Workshop_20111019_V01.pptx Page 18 of 20
p y %
Results for unmanned aircraft from VUSIL trials
“Effectiveness of traffic detection” could not be derived from VUSIL flight trials, as UAS pilots were expecting many conflicts
In view of assumed operational grade equipment, traffic detection is estimated to be at least 99% effecti eestimated to be at least 99% effective all traffic is clearly visible on Radar and SAAFu display effectiveness could be further enhanced with audible signalseffectiveness could be further enhanced with audible signals
Conflict recognition and resolution can be derived from VUSIL trials 25 of 26 conflicts successfully recognised and resolved Maximum likelihood estimate: 96%
Conservative* estimate: 78% Conservative* estimate: 78%*: value of effectiveness for which the event that at most 1 of 26 conflicts is not recognised or
resolved is still credible (i.e. has probability 5%)
3rd EU UAS Workshop – Showing ELOS for VUSIL integration conceptPresentation_DFS_3rd_EU_UAS_Workshop_20111019_V01.pptx Page 19 of 20
Comparison and conclusions
Process Manned Unmanned
Traffic detection 80% 99%
Conflict recognition and resolution
100% 96% (max likelihood)78% (conservative)( )
Overall 80% 95% (max likelihood)77% (conservative)
Under assumption of operational grade equipment,effectiveness of Sense and Avoid in the VUSIL concept is
similar to that of See and Avoid using a conservative approach similar to that of See and Avoid using a conservative approach better than that of See and Avoid using comparable estimators
The VUSIL concept provides and Equivalent Level of Safety for unmanned aircraft than for manned aircraft in a normal VFR context
3rd EU UAS Workshop – Showing ELOS for VUSIL integration conceptPresentation_DFS_3rd_EU_UAS_Workshop_20111019_V01.pptx Page 20 of 20