19
Military Airworthiness Workshop, EU2009.CZ, Olomouc, Czech Republic, 5 June 2009 – M. Allouche WG73 SG2 Briefing Michael Allouche, SG2 Leader WORKING GROUP 73 UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS AIRWORTHINESS (SG2) The European Organisation for Civil Aviation Equipment L’Organisation Européenne pour l’Equipement de l’Aviation Civ

Michael Allouche, SG2 Leader

  • Upload
    fisk

  • View
    53

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

The European Organisation for Civil Aviation Equipment L’Organisation Européenne pour l’Equipement de l’Aviation Civile. WORKING GROUP 73 UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS AIRWORTHINESS (SG2). Michael Allouche, SG2 Leader. Topics for presentation. GENERAL INTRODUCTION EUROCAE WG73 AIRWORTHINESS - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: Michael Allouche, SG2 Leader

Military Airworthiness Workshop, EU2009.CZ, Olomouc, Czech Republic, 5 June 2009 – M. Allouche WG73 SG2 Briefing

Michael Allouche, SG2 Leader

WORKING GROUP 73UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS

AIRWORTHINESS (SG2)

The European Organisation for Civil Aviation EquipmentL’Organisation Européenne pour l’Equipement de l’Aviation Civile

Page 2: Michael Allouche, SG2 Leader

2Military Airworthiness Workshop, EU2009.CZ, Olomouc, Czech Republic, 5 June 2009 – M. Allouche WG73 SG2 Briefing

Topics for presentation

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

EUROCAE WG73 AIRWORTHINESS

Work Approach

Expected outputs

PECULIAR ISSUES

System Safety Parameters & Harmonization Challenges

Airworthiness and Operation interrelated Aspects

CONCLUSIVE REMARKS

Page 3: Michael Allouche, SG2 Leader

3Military Airworthiness Workshop, EU2009.CZ, Olomouc, Czech Republic, 5 June 2009 – M. Allouche WG73 SG2 Briefing

INTRODUCTION- Eurocae

- Eurocae WG73

Page 4: Michael Allouche, SG2 Leader

4Military Airworthiness Workshop, EU2009.CZ, Olomouc, Czech Republic, 5 June 2009 – M. Allouche WG73 SG2 Briefing

The EUROCAE Organisation

Established in 1963 as a European technical forum for administrations, airlines and industry.

Prepares minimum performance specifications for airborne electronic equipment as a basis for EASA Technical Standard Orders (ETSO).

Activities now extended to include complex CNS/ATM systems including their ground segment.

EUROCAE: Is recognised by the European Commission as the unique body

competent for the standardisation and interoperability required for the Single European Sky concept; and

is acknowledged by ICAO which references its documents.

Page 5: Michael Allouche, SG2 Leader

EUROCAE Working Group 73

EUROCAE WG-73 was launched in April 2006 following earlier work by EUROCONTROL, NATO, and JAA.

WG-73 participates in the ICAO UAS Study Group. WG-73 cooperates with other bodies dealing with UAS.

European Aviation Safety Agency

Page 6: Michael Allouche, SG2 Leader

6Military Airworthiness Workshop, EU2009.CZ, Olomouc, Czech Republic, 5 June 2009 – M. Allouche WG73 SG2 Briefing

EUROCAE WG73 Objectives

Requirements framework that will support civilian UAS airworthiness certification and operational approvals.

Safe operation within non-segregated airspace in a manner compatible with other airspace users, including step by step process

Compatibility with the existing ATM regulatory framework; Investigation of longer term ATM adaptations

Military Airworthiness Workshop, EU2009.CZ, Olomouc, Czech Republic, 5 June 2009

Page 7: Michael Allouche, SG2 Leader

7Military Airworthiness Workshop, EU2009.CZ, Olomouc, Czech Republic, 5 June 2009 – M. Allouche WG73 SG2 Briefing

Primary Civil Aviation WG-73 Partners

Working GroupsWorking Groups

Working GroupsWorking Groups

Working Group 73

WG-73 sub-groups

EUROCAE

EUROCAE Industry Members

Council of EUROCAESecretariat

FAA

RTCA SC-203

ICAO

EASA

JARUS

European National

Authorities

EUROCONTROL

Page 8: Michael Allouche, SG2 Leader

8Military Airworthiness Workshop, EU2009.CZ, Olomouc, Czech Republic, 5 June 2009 – M. Allouche WG73 SG2 Briefing

WG73 Leadership / Structure

Subgroup #1:UAS Operations

&Sense and Avoid

Gérard MardinéSAGEM

Subgroup #2:Airworthiness &

Continued Airworthiness

Michael AlloucheIAI

Subgroup #3: Command and Control,

Communications, Spectrum, & Security

Norbert TränappIABG

Chairman: Daniel Hawkes [EUROCAE]Vice Chairman: Gérard Mardiné [SAGEM]Vice Chairman: James Sizemore [FAA]Secretary: Dewar Donnithorne-Tait [AUVSI]EASA: Filippo Tomasello, David HaddonATM: Holger Matthiesen [EUROCONTROL]ICAO UASSG: Tony Henley [BAE Systems] RTCA SC-203: Ken Geiselhart [Lockheed Martin]Standing Advisor: Peter van Blyenburgh [UVSI]

Subgroup #4:UAS <150kg for

VLSO

Ron van de LeijgraafCAA NL

Page 9: Michael Allouche, SG2 Leader

9Military Airworthiness Workshop, EU2009.CZ, Olomouc, Czech Republic, 5 June 2009 – M. Allouche WG73 SG2 Briefing

WG73 Deliverables & Status

Deliverable 1 (Inventory of Issues) Agreed January 2007.

Deliverable 2 (Work Plan) First version end 2007, ongoing iterations

Deliverable 3 (Concept Document) 1st iteration second quarter 2009

Final Agreed Version second quarter 2010.

Deliverable 4 (Command & Control) / Deliverable 5 (Sense & Avoid)

In coordination with US RTCA SC-203

Deliverable 6 (ATM Incompatibility Issues) Ongoing activity.

Page 10: Michael Allouche, SG2 Leader

10Military Airworthiness Workshop, EU2009.CZ, Olomouc, Czech Republic, 5 June 2009 – M. Allouche WG73 SG2 Briefing

EUROCAE WG73 SG2 AIRWORTHINESS

- Work Approach- Expected outputs

Page 11: Michael Allouche, SG2 Leader

11Military Airworthiness Workshop, EU2009.CZ, Olomouc, Czech Republic, 5 June 2009 – M. Allouche WG73 SG2 Briefing

EUROCAE WG73 Airworthiness WP Approach

EASA TC Policy R.Y000-01EASA TC Policy R.Y000-01UAS Type Certification BasisUAS Type Certification Basis

(1)(1) Select & Tailored Manned CSSelect & Tailored Manned CS (2) System Safety Objectives & Criteria(2) System Safety Objectives & Criteria (3) Special Conditions (Control Station, C3 etc…)(3) Special Conditions (Control Station, C3 etc…)

Eurocae WG 73 SG2 Work PackagesGeneric Criteria &

Recommendations Relating to (1) & (2) & (3)

INPUTS/INTERFACES/COORDINATION: SG1 & SG3 WPs

Draft USAR/STANAG 4671 FAA System safety Group

RTCA SC 203 DO-304 & WG1Any other

Consider alsoConsider alsoRestricted Restricted

Type CertificationType Certification& C of A& C of A

Process & CriteriaProcess & Criteria

Page 12: Michael Allouche, SG2 Leader

12Military Airworthiness Workshop, EU2009.CZ, Olomouc, Czech Republic, 5 June 2009 – M. Allouche WG73 SG2 Briefing

EUROCAE UAS WG73 Deliverable 3 Airworthiness Volume(Draft Lay Out)

INTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTION REFERENCESREFERENCES UAS AIRWORTHINESS UAS AIRWORTHINESS

CONSIDERATIONSCONSIDERATIONS UAS TYPE CERTIFICATION BASISUAS TYPE CERTIFICATION BASIS

EASA General RegulationsEASA General Regulations EASA UAS PolicyEASA UAS Policy UAS Airworthiness CategorizationUAS Airworthiness Categorization EASA CS TailoringEASA CS Tailoring EASA CS Tailoring GuidelinesEASA CS Tailoring Guidelines UAS Safety Objectives & CriteriaUAS Safety Objectives & Criteria Additional Airworthiness Additional Airworthiness

Certification CriteriaCertification Criteria

RESTRICTED TC & CoARESTRICTED TC & CoA CONCLUSIONS & CONCLUSIONS &

RECOMMENDATIONSRECOMMENDATIONS

Conceptual approach to support Conceptual approach to support UAS Manufacturers and Civil UAS Manufacturers and Civil Airworthiness AuthoritiesAirworthiness Authorities

Develop further guidelines Develop further guidelines compared to generic EASA UAS compared to generic EASA UAS TC policyTC policy

Identify future UAS Special Identify future UAS Special Conditions issues and parametersConditions issues and parameters

Page 13: Michael Allouche, SG2 Leader

13Military Airworthiness Workshop, EU2009.CZ, Olomouc, Czech Republic, 5 June 2009 – M. Allouche WG73 SG2 Briefing

PECULIAR ISSUES

- System Safety Parameters & Harmonization Challenges- Airworthiness and Operational Interrelated Aspects

Page 14: Michael Allouche, SG2 Leader

14Military Airworthiness Workshop, EU2009.CZ, Olomouc, Czech Republic, 5 June 2009 – M. Allouche WG73 SG2 Briefing

Overall System Safety Objective Parameters

Manned versus Unmanned Requirement (“1309”) Catastrophic Failure Definition tailored to UAS System Safety Objective Definition

Individual versus Overall Objective

Absolute versus Relative Quantitative Objective “Easy” conservative approach : use manned 1309 quantitative target

“as is” (likely penalizing) Absolute approach, defining acceptable risk for specific UAS hazards

Airworthiness versus Operational Safety Objectives Restricted Type Certification Scenario

Page 15: Michael Allouche, SG2 Leader

15Military Airworthiness Workshop, EU2009.CZ, Olomouc, Czech Republic, 5 June 2009 – M. Allouche WG73 SG2 Briefing

Safety Criteria – Harmonization Challenge Illustration

Reference Catastrophic Definition

MIL-STD-882C Death, System Loss or severe environmental damage

AC 23.1309 Failure Conditions that are expected to result in multiple fatalities of the occupants, or incapacitation or fatal injury to a flight crewmember normally with the loss of the airplane.

AMJ25.1309 (A340 TC basis)

Failure conditions which would prevent continued safe flight and landing.

ACJ CS-25.1309 Amdt 5 Failure Conditions, which would result in multiple fatalities, usually with the loss of the aeroplane

STANAG4671/USAR Failure conditions that result in a worst credible outcome of at least uncontrolled flight (including flight outside of pre-planned or contingency flight profiles/areas) and/or uncontrolled crash, which can potentially result in a fatality.

EASA A-NPA 16/2005 The worst UAV hazard event designated hereafter as “Catastrophic” or Severity I Event may be defined as the UAVs inability to continue controlled flight and reach any predefined landing site, i.e. an UAV uncontrolled flight followed by an uncontrolled cra

EASA DRAFT UAS TC POLICY

Not specified. To be part of the manned CS tailoring exercise

FAA-EASA Meeting (April 2009)

Failure Conditions that could result in multiple fatalities on the surface or in the air.

Man

ned

Air

craf

tU

nm

ann

ed A

ircr

aft

Page 16: Michael Allouche, SG2 Leader

16Military Airworthiness Workshop, EU2009.CZ, Olomouc, Czech Republic, 5 June 2009 – M. Allouche WG73 SG2 Briefing

Airworthiness and Operational interrelated aspects

Any equipment that may be required under operational rules shall also be subject to airworthiness approval under relevant criteria

Operational assumptions that may be taken during the airworthiness certification process, as an example:

UAS envisaged mode of operation Emergency Procedures considered in UAS System Safety

Assessment ATC interface,

should be clearly identified. Airworthiness versus Operational Safety Targets Operational Restrictions envisaged in the framework of Restricted

Type Certification Process.

Page 17: Michael Allouche, SG2 Leader

17Military Airworthiness Workshop, EU2009.CZ, Olomouc, Czech Republic, 5 June 2009 – M. Allouche WG73 SG2 Briefing

CONCLUSIVE REMARKS

Page 18: Michael Allouche, SG2 Leader

18Military Airworthiness Workshop, EU2009.CZ, Olomouc, Czech Republic, 5 June 2009 – M. Allouche WG73 SG2 Briefing

Conclusive Remarks

Civil UAS Rule-making process takes more time… Pragmatic approach

EASA UAS TC Policy framework At this stage, Type Certification Basis on a case by case basis,

considering specific UAS character. Restricted TC to be also considered

Intermix of civil and military inevitable Military UAS likely to be used in civil applications

Harmonization is a must Civil / Civil Civil / Military

Eurocae WG73 open to harmonization efforts and related cooperation

Page 19: Michael Allouche, SG2 Leader

19Military Airworthiness Workshop, EU2009.CZ, Olomouc, Czech Republic, 5 June 2009 – M. Allouche WG73 SG2 Briefing

The information in this presentation references draft material for use by EUROCAE WG-73 and

should not be regarded as statements of EUROCAE policy unless approved by the

EUROCAE Council.

The European Organisation for Civil Aviation Equipment

102, rue Etienne Dolet, 92240-Malakoff, FranceTel.: +33 1 40 92 79 30 www.eurocae.net

Thank you for your [email protected]