Impact assessment of the Strategic Planning performance in Shared U-space volumes
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59490/ejtir.2025.25.1.7472Keywords:
U-space, Airspace efficiency, flight trajectory representation, planning timeline and policies, strategic conflict resolution, CISP-USSPs architectureAbstract
This work analyses how the different U-space service providers (USSPs) managing a shared airspace volume will impact on the other’s performance. The paper demonstrates how the various strategic planning USSPs capabilities, ranging from procedures and policies, trajectory representation, as well as the deconflicting strategies, impact on the use of this common resource in terms of effective airspace capacity. The paper brings to practice the concept of Reasonable Time to React by proposing a planning timeline with common milestones for the implementation of the required authorization procedures prior to the flight. The paper analyses how these milestones impact on the effective airspace capacity. Also, the First-Come First-Served planning policy is compared with respect to a more efficient batch planning policy, where flight plan batches are processed to mitigate the potential conflicts existing at the strategic phase. Furthermore, the paper discusses how the capabilities supported by the USSP to represent the trajectory and its associated uncertainty will be also key to optimize the use the airspace. Based on a CORUS-XUAM VLD scenario, a simulation analysis will assess how the USSPs’ capabilities to manage flight planning activities impact on the effective occupation of airspace, jeopardizing in some cases not just the own performance but also that of other airspace users.
Downloads
Metrics
References
BUBBLES. (2020). Defining the BUilding Basic BLocks for a U-Space SEparation Management Service. GA 893206. Https://Doi.Org/10.3030/893206.
CORUS-XUAM. (2020). Concept of Operations for European U-Space Services - Extension for Urban Air Mobility. GA 101017682. Https://Doi.Org/10.3030/101017682.
DACUS. (2020). Demand and Capacity Optimisation in U-space. GA 893864. Https://Doi.Org/10.3030/893864.
EASA. (2020a). EASA: Easy Access Rules for Unmanned Aircraft Systems (Regulations (EU) 2019/947 and (EU) 2019/945).
EASA. (2020b). EASA Opinion No 01/2020: High-level regulatory framework for the U-space. Https://Www.Easa.Europa.Eu/En/Documentlibrary/ Opinions/Opinion-012020.
EASA. (2020). EASA Opinion 01/2020.
Egorov, M., Evans, A., Campbell, S., Zanlongo, S., & Young, T. (2021). Evaluation of UTM Strategic Deconfliction Through End-to-End Simulation. 14th USA/Europe Air Traffic Management Research and Development Seminar, ATM 2021.
EU. (2021). Commision implementing regulation (EU) 2021/664 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32021R0664.
Eurocontrol. (2016). “U-space blueprint.”
Evans, A., Anand, A., Campbell, S., Anagnostou, A., & Tiberia, S. (2023). Simulating Safety and Efficiency Impacts of Airspace Constraints in U-Space Airspace. AIAA/IEEE Digital Avionics Systems Conference - Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.1109/DASC58513.2023.10311226
Evans, A. D., Nova, M. E., Anand, A., Campbell, S., Zanlongo, S., Young, T., & Sarfaraz, N. (2023). Safety Assessment of UTM Strategic Deconfliction. AIAA SciTech Forum and Exposition, 2023. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2023-0965
Evans, A., Egorov, M., & Munn, S. (2020). Fairness in decentralized strategic deconfliction in utm. AIAA Scitech 2020 Forum, 1 PartF. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2020-2203
Janisch, D., Sánchez-Escalonilla, P., Gordo, V., & Jiménez, M. (2021). UAV Collision Risk as Part of U-space Demand and Capacity Balancing. SESAR Innovation Days.
J.Rios. (2018). Strategic deconfliction: System requirements. NASA UAS Traffic Management (UTM) Project.
Liu, Z. Q., Munoz-Gamarra, J. L., & Ramos, J. J. (2023). U-space strategic deconflicting service impact on Very Low Level airspace capacity. Eurosim.
PARTAKE. (2016). PARTAKE. cooPerative depArtuRes for a compeTitive ATM networK sErvice. GA 699307.
Ribeiro, M., Ellerbroek, J., & Hoekstra, J. (2020). Review of conflict resolution methods for manned and unmanned aviation. In Aerospace (Vol. 7, Issue 6). https://doi.org/10.3390/AEROSPACE7060079
Rios, J., Aweiss, A., Jung, J., Homola, J., Johnson, M., & Johnson, R. (2020). Flight demonstration of unmanned aircraft system (Uas) traffic management (utm) at technical capability level 4. AIAA AVIATION 2020 FORUM, 1 PartF. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2020-2851
Rodriguez, L., Balampanis, F., Cobano, J. A., Maza, I., & Ollero, A. (2017). Wind efficient path planning and reconfiguration of UAS in future ATM. 12th USA/Europe Air Traffic Management R and D Seminar.
Schefers, N., Amaro Carmona, M. A., Ramos González, J. J., Saez Nieto, F., Folch, P., & Munoz-Gamarra, J. L. (2020). STAM-based methodology to prevent concurrence events in a Multi-Airport System (MAS). Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2019.11.012
Schefers, N., Ramos González, J. J., Folch, P., & Munoz-Gamarra, J. L. (2018). A constraint programming model with time uncertainty for cooperative flight departures. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2018.09.013
Schefers, N., Piera, M.A., Ramos González, J. J., Nosedal, J. (2016). Causal analysis of airline trajectory preferences to improve airspace capacity. Procedia Computer Science. Elsevier. 104, pp.321-328. ISSN 18770509.
Sesar. (2023). CORUS-XUAM U-space Concept of Operations 4th Edition.
Sunil, E., Ellerbroek, J., Hoekstra, J., Vidosavljevic, A., Arntzen, M., Bussink, F., & Nieuwenhuisen, D. (2017). Analysis of airspace structure and capacity for decentralized separation using fast-time simulations. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 40(1). https://doi.org/10.2514/1.G000528
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Juan José Ramos González, Zhiqiang Liu, Jose Luis Muñoz-Gamarra, Enric Pastor, Cristina Barrado
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
