Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems

, Volume 74, Issue 1–2, pp 465–478 | Cite as

Guidelines for the Integration of Autonomous UAS into the Global ATM

  • Ricardo A. V. Gimenes
  • Lucio F. Vismari
  • Valter F. Avelino
  • João B. CamargoJr.
  • Jorge R. de AlmeidaJr.
  • Paulo S. Cugnasca


The growing social and economic interest in new unmanned aircraft systems (UASs) applications demands that UASs operate beyond the segregated airspace they are currently able to fly. However, UAS operations in non-segregated airspace should be regulated by aeronautical authorities before UASs can share airspace with manned aircraft. It has been a challenge for regulatory authorities to define these regulations because they do not understand the topic well. In addition, there is no consensus in the academic community regarding UAS concepts, such as taxonomy and features. This study proposes guidelines that could support UAS regulations for the future integration of autonomous UASs into the Global Air Traffic Management System (GATM). These guidelines are based on three viewpoints: the aircraft, the piloting autonomous system (PAS) and the integration of autonomous UASs into non-segregated airspace. We recommend that the UAS concept should be based on genuine aeronautical precepts, which would be directly applied, without terminology or conceptual adaptations, for the integration of these aircraft into airspace according to the GATM paradigm.


UAS Safety ATM Certification 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    ICAO: Global Air Traffic Management Operational Concept, 1st edn. Doc 9854 AN/458 (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    FAA: Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)—Certifications and Authorizations. Available: (2009). Accessed 8 July 2013
  3. 3.
    ICAO: Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Circular: UAS 328. Cir 328 AN/190. ISBN: 978-92-9231-751-5 (2011)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Loh, R., Bian, Y., Roe, T.: UAVs in civil airspace: safety requirements. IEEE Aerosp. Electron. Syst. Mag. 24, 5–17 (2009). doi: 10.1109/MAES.2009.4772749 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ross, P.: When will software have the right stuff? IEEE Spectr. 48, 38–43 (2011). doi: 10.1109/MSPEC.2011.6085781 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bhamidipati, K.K., Uhlig, D., NeogiBoulder, N.: Safety and Reliability into UAV Systems: Mitigating the Ground Impact Hazard. AIAA Guidance, Navigation and Control Conference and Exhibit (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Massimo, F.: Capturing emerging complex interactions: safety analysis in air traffic management. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 91, 1482–1493 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Stoop, J., Roed-Larsen, S.: Public safety investigations—a new evolutionary step in safety enhancement? Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 94, 1471–1479 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jamrok, R., Collins, R., Rapids, C.: Aircraft datalink communications for the future. In: The 20th Digital Avionics System Conference, vol. 2. IEEE (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    ICAO: Global Air Navigation Plan for CNS/ATM Systems, 2nd edn. Doc 9750 AN/963 (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Signore, T.L., Girard, M.: The Aeronautical Telecommunication Network (ATN). In: IEEE Military Communications Conference. Proceedings MILCOM 98 (Cat. No.98CH36201). pp. 40–44. IEEE (1998). doi: 10.1109/MILCOM.1998.722541
  12. 12.
    ICAO: International Civil Aviation Organization: Manual of Technical Provisions for the Aeronautical Telecommunication Network. Doc 9705/AN956 (1999)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    FAA: Fact Sheet—Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS). Available: (2010). Accessed 8 July 2013
  14. 14.
    Scarpa, F.: Unmanned aerial vehicles. Aircraft Engeneering and Aerospace Technology 73, 401–402 (2001)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Eurocontrol. CARE Innovative Action Preliminary Study – Integration of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles into Future Air TrafficManagement. (2001). Accessed 19 Sept 2013
  16. 16.
    Eurocontrol. SPEC-0 102. Eurocontrol Specifications for the Use of Military Unmanned Aerial Vehicles as Operational Air Traffic Outside Segregated Airspace. (2007). Accessed 19 Sept 2013
  17. 17.
    US GAO. Federal Actions Needed to Ensure Safety and Expand Their Potential Uses Within the National Airspace System. (2008). Accessed 19 Sept 2013
  18. 18.
    Weibel, R.E., Hansman, R.J.: An integrated approach to evaluating risk mitigation measures for UAV operational concepts in the NAS. In: AIAA’s 4th Infotech@Aerospace Conference, 26–29 September. AIAA-2005-6957, Arlington, VA (2005)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Clothier, R., et al.: A casualty risk analysis for unmanned aerial system (UAS) operations over inhabited areas. In: 2nd Australasian Unmanned Air Vehicles Conference (2007)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cohen, R., Segel, L.A.: Design Principles for the Immune System and Other Distributed Autonomous Systems. Santa Fe Institute Studies in the Sciences of Complexity Proceedings. Oxford University Press, USA (2001)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mekdeci, B., Cummings, M.L.: Modeling multiple human operators in the supervisory control of heterogeneous unmanned vehicles. In: Proceedings of the 9th Workshop on Performance Metrics for Intelligent Systems, PerMIS’09, pp. 1–8. ACM, New York, NY (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Avanzini, G., Minisci, E.A.: Evolutionary design of a full-envelope flight control system for an unstable fighter aircraft. In: 2010 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC), pp. 1–8 (2010)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kuo, B.C.: Automatic Control Systems, 5th edn. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River (1987)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pahsa, A., Kaya, P., Alat, G., Baykal, B.: Integrating navigation amp; surveillance of unmanned air vehicles into the civilian national airspaces by using ADS-B applications. In: Integrated Communications, Navigation and Surveilance Conference (ICNS), 2011, pp. J7-1–J7-7 (2011)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Remenyte-Prescott, R., Andrews, J.D., Chung, P.W.H.: An efficient phased mission reliability analysis for autonomous vehicles. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 95, 226–235 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
  27. 27.
    JAA, Eurocontro. Eurocontrol UAV Task-Force Final Report. A Concept For European Regulations For Civil Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs). (2004). Accessed 19 Sept 2013
  28. 28.
    FAA: Unmanned Aircraft Operations in the National Airspace System (NAS), 2011. Available at Accessed 12 July 2013
  29. 29.
    Eurocontrol. Annex 2 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation–Rules of the Air—International Civil Aviation Organization, 9th edn. (1990)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    ICAO: Annex 14 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation Aerodromes, vol. I and II, 3rd edn. (1999)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Eurocontrol. Annex 1 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation—Personnel Licensing—International Civil Aviation Organization, 9th edn. ICAO (2001)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Turing, A.M.: Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind 59, 433–460 (1950)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Neumann, F., Reichenberger, A., Ziegler, M.: Variations of the turing test in the age of internet and virtual reality. In: Proceedings of the 32nd Annual German Conference on Advances in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 355–362 (2009)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    SAE/ARP 4754: Certification considerations for highly-integrated or complex aircraft systems. ARP 4754 (1996)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Jung, C.G.: On the Nature of the Psyche. Ed Princeton University (1969)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    FAA. Eletronic Code of Federal Regulations, Title 14: Aeronautics and Airspace, Part 141 – Pilot Schools. (2013). Accessed 19 Sept 2013
  37. 37.
    FAA. Eletronic Code of Federal Regulations, Title 14: Aeronautics and Airspace, Part 61 – Certification: Pilots, Flight Instructors, and Ground Instructors. Code of Federal Regulations. (2013). Accessed 19 Sept 2013
  38. 38.
    Vismari, L.F., Camargo Júnior, J.B.: A safety assessment methodology applied to CNS/ATM-based air traffic control system. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 96, 727–738 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    ICAO: Manual on Airspace Planning Methodology for the Determination of Separation Minima (Doc. 9689). International Civil Aviation Organization, Montreal (1998)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Gil, F.O., Camargo Jr., J.B., Almeida Jr., J.R., Cugnasca, P.S., Vismari, L.F., Gimenes, R.A.V., Furtado, V.H.: PIpE SEC: plataform for tests and validation of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) operation in coltrolled airspace. JBATS 6(2), 47–60 (2010)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Eurocontrol: Safety and Quality Relationship Guidelines, European. Air Traffic Management Programme (2001)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ricardo A. V. Gimenes
    • 1
  • Lucio F. Vismari
    • 1
  • Valter F. Avelino
    • 1
  • João B. CamargoJr.
    • 1
  • Jorge R. de AlmeidaJr.
    • 1
  • Paulo S. Cugnasca
    • 1
  1. 1.Safety Analysis Group (GAS), School of EngineeringUniversity of São Paulo (Poli-USP)São PauloBrazil

Personalised recommendations