UMS SKELDAR joins rsquo and forces;s Airflite for array of repair and maintenance support services to the unmanned helicopter SKELDAR V-200 and UAV variants
According to the agreement Airflite, together with operations around Australia, is now a support partner of the joint venture between Saab, UMS SKELDAR and UMS AERO GROUP. Airflite will offer maintenance and engineering solutions and support staff for the rotary V-200 UAV and its variations. UMS SKELDAR states the agreement stipulates another building block to become the regional foundation for Pacific Rim support operations as the UAV company develops its usable footprint with both military and civilian clients throughout the region.
Airflite’s operations include amenities in four airports and 2 bases covering Victoria, New South Wales and Western Australia supplying entry throughout the continent for land and sea-based clients to MRO services.
Axel Cavalli-Bjorkman explains: “That can be a significant milestone in the growth of our global support community that is operational. Our focus of sea and land capabilities, together with avionics and technologies, demands the very finest technical support. We are confident that Airflite, with their customer portfolio, could play a significant role in our expansion of services and capabilities from New Zealand Australia and the broader region. ”
Homer Constantinides included: “We are very happy to produce this joint announcement. This agreement not only affirms our position however signals the commitment to Australia by a UAV innovator. We anticipate a fruitful partnership. ”
To learn more on UMS SKELDAR, such as its world-leading programs, click on http://umsskeldar.aero/.
Released at Tue, 04 Sep 2018 15:53:01 +0000
As drone usage Keeps Growing, operators will need more access into the airspace, often without comprehension — or complete consideration – of the consequences to other airspace users. We are seeing new entrants developing business models that need access to the airspace with no complete understanding of the principles (or even perhaps a belief they can get them altered to match their individual needs), which ’s before — as a society — we begin to consider integrating Beyond Visual Line-of-Sight drone operations frequently and frequently in our skies.
From the proof we have now we can foresee that as drones continue to evolve they will further challenge the aviation systems and so long they need to be adapted into all classes of airspace. Until this stage we can’t consider them as completely integrated with other airspace users.
This post isn’t about supplying a definition of Unmanned Traffic Management (UTM), or even a thorough review of what should and should not be a part of a national UTM system. We will, however, position some of the core capacities in our GuardianUTM Airspace Management Operating System (or even GuardianUTM O/S for short) in enabling a booming drone solutions economy to emerge, with rich, robust and dependable data along with the ability to offer the critical integration with ATM networks in a trusted and consistently reliable manner.
We do not feel it is essential for all classes of drones to be tracked in every place in a country, each of the time. Flipping that around, just drone operations conducted by certain classes of drone in certain locations are very likely to need management. This can be analogous to manned aviation traffic has been managed now, with controlled and uncontrolled airspace, and a pair of principles regulating navigation and entry .
By carefully picking areas where drone traffic is to be managed actively, or in which there are additional conditions put on drones/drone operators in certain locations, a country can more quickly embrace the positive aspects of drones while pragmatically handling dangers connected with negative use.
To cater for a regulatory environment that sets up certain locations and types of drone operations as controlled and consequently requiring some kind of UTM, it is essential to allow communication and data exchange between the present ATM service providers, and the emerging unmanned traffic providers.
It is largely impractical to suppose a commercial entity should control the access into the airspace in a minimal level, or ldquo;airspace to get drones”. In practice, a country is going to want to safeguard the sovereign security of its airspace and not divulge certain surveillance facets into 3rd celebrations, but more pragmatically, industrial entities will contend and in a competitive situation, one can imagine preferential access or the most effective path from A -> B being awarded to the drone being managed by the company managing the airspace, not the company requesting transit through it.
In this new environment, so it makes sense that innovative ANSPs — the recent Airspace Navigation Service Providers – will become channels for the external distribution of significant safety data to drones and drone pilots and so are — at least until new controlled entities are habituated — that the probable single national provider of strategic and tactical de-confliction.
This version will allow a business of emerging UTM service providers to simply incorporate with the national UTM service to obtain all the basic data and regulatory information necessary, to “programmatically” ask entry to the airspace and a fashion that is certain to be just and efficient, and a manner which may provide them with information related to the navigation procedure.
Aren’t ANSPs monopolies?
Even though many assert an ANSP is naturally ‘monopolistic’, it can be argued that a centralised thing of a description will be required to ensure safe, equitable and effective access to and navigation through the airspace. Whatever thing that is, it plays a vital unbiased and trusted part in airspace safety and ensures safe motion whilst respecting priorities that are necessary.
As ANSPs are currently the manned air traffic orchestrators, it seems plausible for them to keep to utilize this expertise to give separation solutions that are similar to drones. The alternative needs a national authority to yield real-time aircraft surveillance information to potentially hundreds of third parties to offer the amount of safety required for drones to prevent each other in addition to manned aircraft. If that is more palatable, then technical solutions do exist that may offer this, however more often than not, Altitude Angel hears from aviation police and ANSPs who are concerned about distributing this data for good reason.
There are some ANSPs that see UTM entirely & lsquo management & rsquo and lots of countries;. We feel UTM and ATM cannot be considered as completely independent of each other anymore; a siloed approach once the airspace is a single common source. We can simply maintain safety by having a frequent perspective; lsquo, a &;amalgamated ’ approach.
Many ANSPs are now championing open entry into the skies by drones
It was just a couple of years back ANSPs and NAAs (“National Aviation Authorities”) were trying hard to comprehend how they might handle the challenges and in certain instances, the ‘dangers ’ posed by drones. At the stage here in the UK, the CAA believed the most suitable alternative was to educate these new entrants to aviation: certainly, this can be a significant factor, but not all way of education were – or still are – equal.
A few decades back, there were a few companies building safety apps to disperse essential educational information regarding where it is safe – or never – to fly ’s drone. But the information was unreliable. It doesn ’ t have a tendency to work well for operations that are drone, although data for aviation functions for manned aviation.
From day onewe purpose-built our very own aeronautical data processing system with drones in mind, meaning all of our apps had the very relevant, accurate and up-to-date information available. However, it had to go past this. Later on, once we rely increasingly on the data for navigation, the machine would need to have quality and data governance controls built-in. Data lineage would need to be audited. Updates authoritative. Without good, reliable and timely data, the apps built upon them may never be contemplated ‘trustworthy’; that is why we distinguished ourselves by becoming so heavily concentrated on quality, precision and ultimately: safety.
Today, relevance and the high quality of our data sets us.
Joining forces with NATS and supported from the CAA, we developed and started the free safety app ‘Drone Assist from NATS, powered by Altitude Angel’ to boost education and awareness of drone operators. As it connects to GuardianUTM, the app has access to the most precise and richest safety data available. By ensuring the data was based around UK rules and regulations, drone operators have been eventually able to readily identify floor and airspace hazards to help them to remain inside the rules. Just twelve months after its launch, the Drone Assist app had over 55,000 registered users and 15 million interactions, making it the most widely used airspace app in britain. We are currently working with ANSPs in different countries to supply options.
Safety is two-way, however many apps are one time
For all of us, this was just the initial step and we immediately looked in how we could share our drone info together with other airspace users and, importantly, airspace managers, assisting to improve situational awareness and bringing the business a step closer to being able to unlock the potential in drones by assisting to tackle one of the dangers: visibility.
The incorporation of a voluntary ‘Fly ’ report allowed drone pilots to ‘announce’ in which they had been flying by simply pressing a button in the app, which “locks on” into the consumer ’s position through the GPS inside their telephone and establishes a cylinder with radius 500m round them. We immediately had over 12,000 flight reports created via this feature, however we wanted to carry it a step farther and provide commercial and much more critical drone pilots further and advanced planning choices.
Another development was to focus on two key tasks: firstly, allowing drone operators to plan and notify their flights ahead of the procedure (the initial version simply endorsed ‘fly , right now’-RRB- and second, to allow airports and other airspace supervisors to establish areas of interest where they could get information on these reported drone flights. The purpose was to open a communication channel between airspace supervisors and drone pilots.
Helping to deal with the surge in drone flight requests near airports: Considering the future of ATM/UTM integration through GuardianUTM O/S and digital flight strip systems
A couple of months ago, we wrote a blog post called ‘Drone operations on the rise in UK airports‘. The quick adoption of drones by specialists and the increased utilization of a flight preparation system — if not handled properly – could potentially overwhelm airports, demand significant personnel to handle and consequently have a pretty noticeable impact on day-to-day operations. This is particularly so when permissions are needed in order to fly a drone in a quantity of airspace.
Pre-empting this matter, we started working with Frequentis (an tactical partner) who manufacturer smartStrips®, an Electronic Flight Simulator alternative deployed in many of the planet ’s busiest airports.
The controller, through the digital flight-strip (like those used to keep track of unmanned aviation), can now interact and handle drone action through the digital flight-strip system — that can be a crucial step in UTM/ATM integration, because it doesn’t need any new hardware to be deployed from the airport environment.
Powered from our GuardianUTM O/S, the machine carefully monitors incoming flight accounts and evaluates them based on a set of rules configured from the airport to select that may be automatically approved, which must be reversed, or that need the interest of multiple stakeholders before a decision can be issued. The machine has been designed to inform the controller of drone action related to their activity.
Bridging the gap between UTM and ATM systems, Altitude Angel simplifies the System Wide Information Management (SWIM) theory to ease the significant data processing, quality controllers and security against cybersecurity concerns. But, sharing data between UTM and ATM isn’t the objective. There are several authorities and companies wanting information about the activities happening in the airspace around them, whether it’s private infrastructure company (for instance, a rail operator or power company), a local jurisdiction (for example, a council) or an airport; data needs to be shared.
We all know that there’ll be numerous UTM Service Providers from the next several years, however it’s most likely a state will have just one backbone to ensure fairness and deliver a single picture that is air-situation. GuardianUTM O/S offers national government with the choices concerning which things it takes to run various characteristics of the general UTM service, such as — registration vs. traffic separation, navigation and routing vs. weather.
Handling a UTM eco-system in which quite a few UTM/U-Space providers exist, within one area or country is complex. There is a need to ensure suitable data sharing, ensuring everyone/system has a frequent perspective of the airspace.
Similarly, there is a need to prioritise various operations, e.g. urgent health over routine parcel delivery, and thus some priority is essential.
Ultimately, safe and effective utilisation of the airspace demands a high level of predictability of both manned and unmanned aircraft. We believe a service that offers real time decision and the national safety assurance making that UTM systems can rely on is needed. Separation, if left to the countless smaller companies who only care for their main operation — not constructing worldwide traffic avoidance systems — may simply connect in the foundation layer, whereas bigger companies can feel assured they can de-conflict their own fleets with the assurance the national airspace image will be digitally available to them.
GuardianUTM O/S stipulates a state with a mechanism to specify or update rules or regulations and apply restrictions in a fashion that can be employed by most of UTM service providers, preventing any chance that UTMs that are dependent are out-of-date.
This foundation process is then enabled to critical functions such as traffic separation solutions, access to airspace, flight characteristics and registration, enabling a drone ecosystem to thrive.
We envisage a time that ’ s what we ’ re here to ensure, and in which service providers – in the UTM area and in ATM – work but we must get the foundations right.