Airspace / Traffic Management
The success of AAM depends on introducing a new level of capability into the NAS, including the airspace itself, communications methods, ATM supporting high traffic density, integration of autonomous flight operations, and new types of infrastructure.
All of these advancements will have to work alongside and integrate seamlessly with today’s manned commercial and general aviation air operations.
Efficient airspace operations means less time in transit.
This benefits the UAM aircraft in energy expended, and carbon dioxide emitted.
There is the opportunity for additional revenue generation.
It benefits the consumer with more rapid transits.
Resiliency in airspace operations is the ability of the system to withstand a major disruption in operations and recover within an acceptable timeframe.
Looked at another way, to be resilient, the system must be able to detect (including, potentially, the ability to predict) the major disruption, respond appropriately, and then rapidly recover.
Another aspect of resiliency is graceful degradation, the ability to maintain limited functionality even when portions of the system have been degraded or rendered inoperative.
Secure datalink is essential for AAM since voice-based communication has low bandwidth and introduces a multiple-second delay from event occurrence, to announcement on frequency, to comprehension by the human recipient.
With secure datalink, real-time positions and velocities will enable software to rapidly identify and resolve conflicts in nominal and complex multivehicle route geometries that are impossible for human control- lers to mentally model and manage.
Air traffic contingency management will be required whenever unexpected bad weather is encountered, system elements fail or are attacked, or non-cooperative air traffic enters an airspace region normally occupied by cooperative traffic.
Autonomous two-vehicle deconfliction and redundant datalinks are on the immediate horizon for manned aircraft and unmanned air systems.
Weather and wind observations and forecasts improve each year.
Autonomous multivehicle traffic deconfliction and increasingly resilient datalink systems are key technology needs for safe AAM in densely populated airspace.
AAM will require autonomous contingency management.
Autonomous systems are distinct from traditional automation in their authority to make decisions and take necessary action without human oversight.
Autonomous system authority is essential for AAM to assure risks are mitigated in time to restore a safe flight operational state despite the absence of a highly qualified onboard flight crew.
Contingency management autonomy has to select and execute mitigation actions accurately and without vehicle-level loss of control, collision with other aircraft or obstacles/terrain, or unnecessary disruption to other air traffic or traffic management services.
Contingency management autonomy will also need to integrate effectively with human system participants and evolve gracefully from legacy systems.
The NAS today is the result of decades of evolution, starting with free flight navigation and migrating to procedure-based separation, then to radar and radio navigation-aid supported control systems, sophisti- cated terminal area positive control procedures, and, most recently, Global Positioning System-enabled precise navigation procedures.
Yet, this system still depends on human operators to play key decision-making roles throughout routine operations.
Human eyes remain the most important and capable positioning and collision avoidance capability in the system.
Human judgment remains the most capable risk assessment and safety mitigator in the system.
As the industry moves to higher-density air transportation systems that require automation of these human functions, the software that manages them must make a leap in capability compared to today. Data characterizing the state of the system must increase orders of magnitude in fidelity.
Systems to monitor the ongoing quality and reliability of that data must be implemented.
Further, the software system now has to take over the judgment and decision-making functions, detecting risks, making assessments, and taking mitigating actions.
This leap in capability is a stark departure from recent evolutionary progress in the NAS.
The design of this type of system is distinctly new and different and represents one of the first instances of a generalized capability that humankind will build across many applications in the coming decades.
A challenge that the broader technology community faces today is to embed software and automation into physical-world systems, such as transportation, and thereby to bring the speed, precision, and proven productivity benefits of the digital world into these systems.
However, the physical world is much more complex and varied than the pristine, controlled structures of pure digital data systems.
The physical world must be sensed using imperfect tools whose performance can vary greatly based on the environment.
Signal and noise must be separated, and the underlying data themselves can sometimes lack the full information fidelity to make decisions.
A challenge is ensuring that vehicles, piloted or not, are integrated into an air traffic system in which parts of that system must be fully automated to handle the high frequency and density of projected operations.
Existing ATC systems, airports and heliports, and other aspects of how aircraft are certified and operated today are also directly applicable to UAM, especially in the initial "crawl" phase which will be starting small.
UAM services are envisaged to generate very-low altitude air traffic at scale.
Such low-level altitude airspace intended for both eVTOL and UAS operations is perceived as an extension of urban public space and, as such, the governance and management of the U-space shall be of a multilevel nature and extend down to the level of local and regional authorities.
U-space, in other words, envisages a set of new services and specific procedures designed to support safe, efficient, and secure access to airspace for a large number of vehicles.
The increasing numbers of aircraft, whether manned or unmanned, planned to operate simultaneously within urban areas will require new approaches to air traffic management.
FAA
FAA's UAS traffic management (UTM) concept can be described as a system that provides traffic management through the integration of humans, information, technology, facilities and services, supported by air and ground and/or space-based communications, navigation and surveillance.
ICAO
ICAO, building on the work of its UAS Advisory Group (UAS-AG), has recently published its Common Framework with Core Principles for Global Harmonization, providing States that are considering the implementation of a UTM system with a framework and core capabilities of a “typical” UTM system.
ICAO works with its 193 Member States and industry groups to reach consensus on Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) for aviation, manned and unmanned.
The SARPs developed by ICAO’s Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems Panel (RPASP) support IFR operations in controlled airspace and at controlled aerodromes.
The current focus of the RPASP is on airworthiness, operations, operator certification, air traffic management, C2 Link, DAA, safety management and security.
The Panel’s work will also provide a context within which simplified regulations can be developed for less demanding national operations.
AIRBUS
March 2023 - Adacel’s Aurora ATM System Approved for use in the Seychelles
Adobe Acrobat document [1.5 MB]
Adobe Acrobat document [435.8 KB]
Adobe Acrobat document [1.4 MB]
Adobe Acrobat document [6.9 MB]
Adobe Acrobat document [3.2 MB]
Adobe Acrobat document [8.9 MB]
Adobe Acrobat document [19.9 MB]
Adobe Acrobat document [1.9 MB]
It is of prime importance to enable and mobilize the private sector to innovate on higher performance airspace management technologies.
As technology history has shown, this can be done, in part, with the public sector leading the research on the system topology and the protocols, data formats, and data exchange standards that define the broader system and giving private sector participants certainty as to what objectives to innovate toward.
Data exchange for AAM is diverse in content, size, and real-time update requirements.
Detect and avoid and separation assurance applications require a common geospatial framework for aircraft state updates as well as communicating intent and ATC directives.
AAM is a nodal transportation network in contrast to road and rail, which are linear networks. In linear networks, a single vehicle can cause congestion, and these effects can ripple through the networks.
The flexibility, resilience, and low resource intensity of nodal networks are key strengths and, as evidenced by water transport throughout history, have proven value.
Inherent direct connectivity between every point.
No path infrastructure to build and maintain.
Flexible capacity.
Resilient to disruption.
Small footprint.
Easier to overlay into already developed areas.
The majority of current communications between aircraft and ATC use voice spoken over VHF radio frequencies.
Among the other forms of safety-critical communication in the NAS is information exchanged between aircraft and traffic management systems through radar and transponders, as well as through transponders that communicate directly between aircraft in certain circumstances.
New communication methods are needed to support greater scale and also to support the requirements of unmanned or autonomous aircraft.
Although several methods and communications standards exist that could meet this need, consensus around a method or set of methods to focus on has not been reached, nor has agreement been reached on which methods would be considered safety-critical under either nominal or off-nominal conditions. Depending on the application, differing views remain as to the order of communication, such as whether or when vehicles would communicate directly with each other or circumstances when all communication would be with a centralized traffic management system.
Uncertainty also persists with respect to the physical layer for communications links, with options ranging from LTE and 5G networks to satellite links, as well as purpose-built radio frequency links using either licensed or unlicensed portions of the frequency spectrum.
Today, there is no globally accepted spectrum for autonomous system command and control.
The development of standardized command non payload communication capability has been stymied as a result.
Overall, a lack of a globally accepted communications architecture is a key gap to solve for and has follow-on impacts for choices and design around ATM solutions for AAM, including autonomous systems.
Current airspace configuration, operational rules, and procedures did not anticipate the emergence of an autonomous aviation ecosystem.
Introducing autonomous air vehicles carrying freight or passengers alongside manned aviation operations is highly complex.
From a design standpoint, vehicles incorporating increasingly automated software capabilities will have to be designed, developed, and certified.
Closely interlinked with design aspects, operations will have to be defined and procedures for the airspace system created to work with autonomous flight.
These efforts require precise coordination and agreement on the exact overall capabilities the efforts are directed toward.
Current challenges to integrating autonomy into the NAS include further research and development of core technologies as well as systems engineering to integrate the different components into a system that is fieldable and able to support flight testing.
Among the many examples of gaps within this field is the lack of detect and avoid capability, or the ability of the autonomous vehicle to remain “well clear” of other users of the airspace so as to not create a collision hazard that impacts safety.
The defense community has made substantial progress in these capabilities in recent years and is a potential source of relevant technology transfer.
At present, operation of autonomous vehicles is generally relegated to segregated airspace volumes and over the most rural areas.
The expectation is for introduction to continue in line with a trend that introduces new capabilities with respect to the overall risk profile that these operations present, initially favoring lower risk operations—for example, over sparsely populated areas.
The future air traffic system will have all classes of vehicles sharing principally the same airspace and that airways, approach routes, and technology will sort the traffic out and prevent conflicts.
Ultimately, routine “file and fly” access—the ability to operate “at will” without the need for one-off special approval for each operation—to all classes of airspace, subject to constraints of airspace design and airspace use by other traffic, is essential to the success of later applications of AAM.
At UML-4 UAM aircraft operate predominantly in the UAM Operating Environment (UOE) shown above.
The UOE is a flexible airspace area encompassing the areas of high UAM flight activity.
The maximum possible extent of the UOE is static and can be represented on traditional aeronautical charts.
The extent of this static, maximal UOE can be redefinedand recharted over time following accepted methods.
The extent of the UOE is partially dependent upon where UAM service providers are authorized to provide services and the geographical extent of their infrastructure used to provide those services. Within this maximum area, there are flexible areas that are “available” and can change (i.e., the available area is “flexible”).
For example, if the flow pattern at a near by major airport changes, the available UOE may change to avoid potential traffic conflicts among UAM aircraft and traditional commercial airlines.
Changes in the available UOE likely occur on the order of a few times per day; these changes, as well as the current extent of the available UOE, are reported in the PSU Network.
The figure above shows an overview of the UOE and its various participants at UML-4.
The UOE exists adjacent to actively controlled airspace rather than as a separate airspace class.
It is expected that the rules and operating procedures for the UOE will mature as aircraft and PSUs become more capable.
The UOE is a UTM - inspired construct.
Like the UTM construct, the UOE is an area that coexists with the traditional airspace classes and is managed by third-party federated service suppliers.
The UOE is flexible and primarily located in urban and nearby metropolitan areas.
Each metropolitan area’s UOE is tailored to meet the needs of that area.
Factors impacting the extent of the UOE include the topography of the urban an metropolitan area (e.g., building height), the layout of controlled airspace in the area (e.g., the location of and altitude floor of adjacent Class B airspace), the geography of the local area, areas of high demand, and unique airspace characteristics (e.g., restricted areas).
The figure above simplifies the boundaries by showing the floor of the UOE reaching ground level, but it is anticipated that the UOE floor will reach ground level only where necessary, such as near ground-level UAM aerodromes.
The UOE will not extend to the urban floor in all places because UAM aircraft are not likely to cruise near ground level and so that UAM aircraft do not unnecessarily interfere with UTM operations.
Where a major city and a minor outlying city are in proximity (e.g., the Dallas-Fort Worth or Washington, DC, Capital Beltway regions), the UOE may encompass both metropolitan areas.
UAM aircraft can fly both inside and outside of the UOE (i.e., to reach the exurbs), but aircraft flying outside the UOE will follow the requirements of the airspace they operate within, including satisfying equipage requirements.
Other aircraft can fly in the UOE if they are able to safely participate in the management and separation of traffic within the UOE, most likely through a connection with a PSU.
One or more PSUs may operate in a UOE and may provide services throughout the entire volume or just a portion of it.
The volume shown in the figure above is intended to be indicative of the volume of airspace where PSU service is available.
In such cases, the UOE may extend into actively ATC-controlled airspace (such as the Class B, C, or D airspace surrounding an airport), as depicted in the figure above, which includes a UAM aerodrome co-located with an airport.
Departure and arrival routes to such UAM aerodromes for UAM aircraft through actively ATC-controlled airspace are established following a specified navigable path.
In such circumstances (operations transporting passengers to or from an airport), aircraft are equipped both for the UOE as well as the class of controlled airspace through which they intend to operate.
UAM operations will continue to rely on PSUs when utilizing these paths and will not be in communication with ATC under normal operations.
At UML-4, it is anticipated that UAM is also one component in an intermodal transportation system and UAM aerodromes are located str ategically near other forms of transportation, including traditional commercial aviation.
Many ATM functions are performed on behalf of fleet operators by PSUs.
Many PSUs are third- party operated and supply flight safety services under rules and regulations established by the FAA.
Qualified PSUs provide flight- planning support and ATM services (communications, separation, sequencing, information exchange, etc.) within the UOE.
The PSUs also enable sharing of information among the fleet operators (the entity that employs the aircraft crew and,in some instances, performs dispatch duties) and the FAA on operational intent ,airspace constraints, and other necessary information to enable safe operations.
PSUs provide a dynamic common operating picture of the UOE (i.e., the ability to understand constraints, the location and intent of all air traffic, etc.) through information sharing and exchange between fleet operators, automated systems on the aircraft, and the FAA to achieve safe operations.
The FAA has on-demand access to UOE operational information and can dynamically modify the airspace (e.g., close/expand areas and/or restrict operations) via a server-initiated data exchange (“push”) to PSUs based on safety and operational demands (e.g., emergencies, sporting events, military operations).
UOE rules and procedures apply to all aircraft operating within the UOE.
Key concepts to understand airspace rules and procedures for the UOE include participation, operations plan, and performance authorization.
These concepts are described below.
Participation: All aircraft must meet requirements established for the type of operation and associated airspace volume/route in which they are operating.
Given the density and complexity of operations at UML-4, it is necessary for safe operations that there is a common understanding across all participants of the operational intent and capabilities of aircraft in the UOE; this common understanding is provided by PSUs, which provide ATM services.
A fleet operator or aircraft that exits or enters the UOE as part of their operations plan may continue to share information with UOE participants while they are outside of the UOE.
Operations Plan: Prior to operating in the UOE, all aircraft must submit an operations plan.
The operations plan is similar to a flight plan and contains flight path, planned departure/arrival times, alternate UAM aerodromes, and other data elements describing the operation that may be established by SDOs (e.g., Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics (RTCA), American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), etc.) and approved by the FAA.
The fleet operator is responsible for the transmission of the initial operations plan to the PSU.
The PSU may suggest modifications to the operations plan, and negotiation between the PSU and fleet operator may occur before an initial operations plan is finalized.
Changes to the operations plan can also be made during flight.
Performance Authorization: The FAA authorizes all participants in the UOE through approval of the performance authorization.
Authorization to operate within the UOE is automated and seamlessly integrated as part of the broader information exchange system among fleet operators, PSUs, and the FAA.
The PSU transmits information from the fleet operator to the FAA, which automatically provides verification of authorizing to operate.
UAM aircraft connect via a data link to their fleet operator and PSU.
In the case of fleet operations, the fleet operator may be a centralized or automated dispatch; alternatively, an individual aircraft crew of a UAM aircraft could serve as their own fleet operator.
The fleet operator connects to a PSU for the operation.
Aircraft also transmit information directly to other aircraft through vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communication, and to the PSU and their fleet operator.
This information includes position information and data needed to aide in collision avoidance, separation, deconfliction, scheduling, and other ATM functions.
The path of data transmission depends on the system’s architecture, (e.g., aircraft, fleet operator, PSU) and the purpose of the information. Information to enable safe flight and requires constant updating such as proximity information, aircraft and obstacle mitigation, etc., is processed on the aircraft and communication that occurs V2V is pushed to the PSU Network for status monitoring. Information that changes less frequently (e.g., operations plan) can be processed at the PSU and pushed to the aircraft. The PSU also communicates with other PSUs within the PSU Network, to execute strategic flight path planning based on standardized deconfliction and prioritization protocol approved by the FAA.
The FAA, through Flight Information Management System (FIMS), can dynamically push constraints and directives to the PSU Network for inclusion in strategic and tactical (in -flight) planning decisions. Information that is transmitted over the PSU network adheres to agreed -upon interface standards.
Supplemental Data Service Providers (SDSPs) provide services that support operations directly to PSUs or fleet operators (e.g., specialized weather data, surveillance, constraint information).
This information exchange occurs between the SDSP and PSU, aircraft, fleet operator, or combination of the three depending on the nature of the information.
Time-critical information (e.g.,weather) may go directly to the aircraft, where non-time-critical information (e.g., fleet management information) may go to the fleet operator, which then relays it to the aircraft.
Other transmission variables (e.g., push vs pulled information or the frequency of updates) are dependent upon issues such as the nature of the information, the bandwidth required, and where the decision authority resides.
All SDSP services meet required cybersecurity standards to operate in the PSU Network to ensure integrity of the network.
Public safety organizations such as first responders can access the PSU Network to monitor UOE operations.
When responding to emergencies, these first responders can coordinate with the FAA to deactivate airspace above response scenes to prevent harm to overflying by UAM and/or UAS aircraft.
The public is also able to monitor operations in the PSU Network for informational purposes as approved by the FAA and public safety agencies.
Airspace System Design and Implementation
- In the UOE environment, ATM services are provided primarily by private sector PSUs that meet requirements enacted by the FAA. PSUs can be public sector or private sector entities, but it is anticipated most are private sector entities.
- The UOE is established through a collaborative design process that is used by the FAA today with enhanced input from state and local governments due to the increased impact on state and local stakeholders given a UAM’s frequent low-altitude operations.
- UOE coverage is tailored to a specific metropolitan area by the FAA with input from the community.
- In some cases, the UOE may extend into ATC-controlled airspace to enable certain missions.
- Significant technological advances in traffic management through the maturation of increasingly
complex operations likely establish the capability to accommodate higher volumes of air traffic, including passenger and cargo UAM operations, along with other traffic requiring low-altitude traffic management in the UOE airspace (e.g., sUAS operations). Altitude management occurs via PSU system coordination within parameters established by industry consensus and preauthorized by FAA.
- UAM aircraft in the UOE largely operate in metropolitan areas extending into the urban periphery below controlled airspace (except in the terminal environment) and above the urban canyon.
- UOE operations and PSUs seamlessly operate concurrent with controlled airspace managed by traditional human-operated ATC in specific areas of the terminal environment where it has been preauthorized that safe operations can occur.
- The UOE is tailored based on the unique characteristics and needs of the specific metropolitan environment and geography.
- In the case where a fleet operator experiences an off-nominal event, redundant emergency landing locations exist to allow for safe landing in the form of en route UAM aerodromes and safe non-UAM aerodrome landing areas identified by automated systems.
- At UML-4, en route operations generally occur above the urban canyon (area immediately above the urban environment) environment and below traditionally actively controlled airspace operations, reducing community noise, potential communications interference, etc.
– To the extent possible, landing and terminal areas are placed outside of controlled airspace to avoid unacceptable additional ATC workload.
- UML-4 airspace operational roles, rules, and procedures are established and defined within the UOE. • PSUs provide a dynamic, common operating picture of the UOE through information -sharing and
exchange between fleet operators, aircraft, and the FAA to achieve safe operations.
- The FAA has on-demand access to UOE operational information and can dynamically modify the airspace (e.g., close areas or restrict operations) via push (server-initiated data exchange) to PSUs
based on safety and operational demands (e.g., emergencies, sporting events, military operations).
- Operations are supported by an environment designed to promote safety through information exchanges and shared situational awareness that cooperative operations require.
- The UOE framework ensures the safe conduct of aircraft operations through the issuance of performance authorizations that ensure operational and performance requirements are met, the sharing of flight intent (flight path, departure time, departure/arrival and alternate UAM aerodromes among other elements) and airspace constraint information among operators, and the use of services, technologies, and equipage to deconflict flight paths.
- At UML-4, all UAM aircraft operating in the UOE are required to follow all airspace equipage and aircraft performance requirements, including participating in the PSU Network. This includes sUAS as well as larger passenger and cargo aircraft that are piloted, remotely piloted, or highly automated.
- Users operating outside of the PSU Network may voluntarily participate in the system by utilizing information from the network for situational awareness or participate actively in the system by making their position and intent known.
- PSUs and participating aircraft are required to share data to support operational planning, aircraft deconfliction, conformance monitoring, and emergency information dissemination, and facilitate fleet operator response.
- Defined standards and requirements for PSU data exchange are well established by UML -4 and are expected to be part of the requirements by FAA for PSU authorization.
- At UML-4, a network of PSU providers delivers UAM traffic management services to enable safe and efficient UAM operations within the UOE with minimal FAA involvement.
- The PSUs communicate airspace restrictions, receive and coordinate operations plans, and request dynamic route changes for its users. PSUs also exchange data and record data as required by regulators and the FAA for regulatory and fleet operator accountability purposes.
- SDSPs provide enhanced services for safe operations to fleet operators (e.g., a, specialized weather data, surveillance, constraint information). SDSPs may also provide information directly to PSUs or fleet operators. SDSPs may provide safety-critical services.
- The FAA’s FIMS is an API gateway for data exchange between PSU Network participants and FAA systems.
- At UML-4, fleet operators maintain communication with PSUs and UAM aircraft in compliance with performance criteria and regulatory requirements to support data exchange required for the operation.
- PBN (or future PBN-like) requirements will enable precise flight operations, even in visibility-restricted conditions. The ability to manage cooperative and non-cooperative traffic are required for semiautonomous operations under visibility-restricted conditions with a combination of external data feeds and onboard capabilities, such as operating at reduced separation minima, long-range obstacle avoidance, and the exception of planned operations or emergency landings.
- Cyber-specific standards may be necessary given the reliance on automated systems. These
requirements shall include degraded communications and connectivity considerations.
- The implications of 5G-based connectivity include the effects of beamforming, frequency agility, and
other features. These and other characteristics of the plausible telecom protocols for UAM connectivity deserve research attention.
- While any aircraft that meets UOE requirements may operate in the UOE, it is anticipated that the majority of passenger-carrying UAM operations at UML-4 will occur along flexible, high-density routes betweenpointswheretraveler demand ishigh andit iscost-effectivetodeveloptheinfrastructureand systems needed to support UAM operations for the public.
- High-density routes are dynamic based on demand and negotiated with the FAA and community stakeholders. In some instances, it is likely use of certain routes is restricted to UAM aircraft meeting certain performance capabilities (e.g., speed and maneuvering). Communities be to influence high- density route establishment through community engagement considering environmental policy and through zoning ordinances.
Airspace and Fleet Operations Management
- PSUs provide strategic and intactical deconfliction by exchanging data within the PSU Network. This data set, with elements to be defined by industry consensus and approved by the FAA, includes information such as departure time, operations plan, intended arrival destination, and alternate UAM aerodromes.
- Service suppliers (PSUs and SDSPs) serving UOEs are certificated by the FAA based on standards developed by standards development organizations (RTCA, ASTM, etc.) and implemented by the FAA.
- Non-safety-criticalSDSPsmayoperateinthePSUNetworkwithFAAapproval(ratherthancertification); however, safety-critical SDSP functions will also need to be certificated.
- Operations are planned to avoid high-risk areas where possible (e.g., tall buildings, stadiums, etc.), as well as permanent and temporary areas where restrictions may be in place (either by the FAA or negotiated with local authorities).
- System-wide tests for UML-4 include large-scale graceful degradation procedures and demonstrations to ensure that the system can handle large-scale disruptions.
- Under the principle of airspace equity, any cooperative aircraft that meets UOE performance-based standards should have access to these routes; however, flight characteristics dictate the aircraft trajectory and location (operations plan) of operation.
- The urban environment contains unique and challenging wind, turbulence, and temperature characteristics when compared to higher altitude flying and outside of urban canyon.
- Urban micro climate weather, wind measurements and predictions, and appropriate data exchange allows fleet operators and UOE stakeholders to know if they are capable of safely completing a flight based on the aircraft’s performance characteristics and the aircraft performance standards of other aircraft transiting in the high-density operations airspace.
- Weather data collection, analysis, prediction, and reporting is tailored to meet the needs of the fleet operator to operate as safely, effectively and efficiently as possible within high-density airspace operations.
- PSU data can be accessed directly by public entities such as the FAA, law enforcement, DHS, or other relevant government agencies on an as-needed basis. To accomplish this, a PSU must be (1) discoverable to the requesting agency, (2) available and capable to comply with an issued request, and (3) a trusted source (i.e., FAA, Department of Defense (DoD), or law enforce ment) as mitigation actions may be taken as a result of the information provided.
- Fleet operators may coordinate with surface transportation providers to carry passengers to/from UAM aerodromes to maximize efficiencies. This can take the form of industry alliances and partnerships negotiated by stakeholders, including government bodies, to leverage surface transportation networks and ensure UAM operations can effectively work within the local transportation ecosystem.
- Fleet operators manage the complexity and quantity of UAM operations to stay within noise regulations in place at an intermediate state.
Contact Me
Sarah Nilsson, J.D., Ph.D., MAS
602 561 8665
You can also fill out my
Get Social with Me
Legal Disclaimer
The information on this website is for EDUCATIONAL purposes only and DOES NOT constitute legal advice.
While the author of this website is an attorney, she is not YOUR attorney, nor are you her client, until you enter into a written agreement with Nilsson Law, PLLC to provide legal services.
In no event shall Sarah Nilsson be liable for any special, indirect, or consequential damages relating to this material, for any use of this website, or for any other hyperlinked website.
Steward of
I endorse the following products
KENNON (sun shields)
Print 