The first six months of 2020 has seen the global UAS traffic management (UTM) market fragment, overturning business plans, market assumptions and business strategies, according to Unmanned Airspace’s latest version of its report The market for UAV Traffic Management Services – 2020-2024 (https://www.unmannedairspace.info/uav-traffic-management-services/_.
Two events have caused this fragmentation. The first is publication of the FAA’s UTM business model based on the successful Low Altitude Authorization and Notification Capability (LAANC) programme, in which UTM services will be only partly funded from services charges to operators – commercial and other technical services will have to provide the bulk of UTM service supplier (USS) revenue. The second has been a clarification of the potential technical UTM capabilities of mobile network operators (MNOs),
From the GUTMA/GSMA 2020 “Connected Skies” series of webinars it is clear that MNOs will not only be able to provide connectivity but integrate UTM services such as geofencing and alerts, dynamic ground-risk determination, virtual “human-eye” piloting, drone tracking and positioning, real-time data analytics, weather condition reporting and forecasting, post-flight data analysis and reports, airspace access authorisations and cloud services into an inter-connected eco-system. For MNOs, their networks will be to support drone operator (command and control/payload download) services in parallel to UTM services.
This changes the landscape of the UTM market. Where will this leave USS companies?
At first sight, in a very difficult position. There is still clear top-line revenue to be had from working with air navigation service providers (ANSPs) by providing strategic UTM architectures, especially at a national level, and around 2030 there will be a major influx of new business from towns, cities and regions requiring bespoke UTM systems for urban/advanced air mobility concepts. Providing an interface between the UTM and ATM systems is another key role USSs can play. But the prospect of slogging it out with multiple, super-competitive, technically-advanced USS companies in the tactical UTM market is unappealing unless they can develop a range of USPs which will allow them to dominate a sector. No wonder that over the last six months many have begun to re-examine their business models, providing other drone related services such as pizza delivery, insurance and construction site operations integration.
With 5G, MNOs have a technical capability and financial reserves that make partnership agreements with USS companies highly complex – and have very different views on who will be providing what in the future UTM eco-system (see table one).
In the long term USS company business plans will be driven to a large part – in the USA and Europe at least – by the rules of engagement for UTM services currently being drawn up by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA). These are currently being drafted by both organisations, with the final iterations likely to be broadly amended from the draft versions following inputs from industry and – in EASA’s case – States.
Table one: Potential UTM roles for ANSPs, USSPs, CAAs, MNOs and others
| Who provides what services in a U-space eco system – how USS see the future | Who provides what services in a U-space eco system – how MNOs see the future |
|
U1 e-Registration – CAA Electronic chip – MNO/ANSP/USSP Drone operator online registration – CAA Drone online registration – CAA Registration enforcement – CAA Registration Authority -CAA e-Identification – MNO/ANSP/USSP Drone Identification – MNO/ANSP/USSP e-identification enforcement – CAA/ANSP Identification Authority – CAA Pre-tactical geo-fencing – USSP/ANSP Geo-limitation database – CAA/USSP/ANSP Drone operator authentication and authorisation – CAA/ANSP
U2 Tactical geo-fencing – USSP/ANSP/MNO? Live airspace data feed – USSP/ANSP/MNO? Area infringement notification – USSP/ANSP/MNO? Flight planning management – USSP/ANSP Automated FPL validation – USSP/ANSP Operations digital authorisation – USSP/ANSP Digital NOTAM – USSP/ANSP/SDSP Weather information – USSP/SDSP Low-altitude wind forecast – USSP/SDSP Actual low-altitude wind info – SDSP Weather info collection – USSP Weather hazard alerts – SDSP/USSP Tracking – MNO/USSP Radio Positioning infrastructure – MNO/USSP Real-time tracking -MNO/USSP Tracking data recording – USSP Monitoring -USSP Air situation monitoring – USSP Flight non-conformance detection – USSP Area infringement detection – USSP Traffic info multicast- USSP Alert/Report line – USSP Drone aeronautical information management -USSP/SDSP/ANSP UTM-relevant static aeronautical data – USSP/SDSP/ANSP UTM-relevant dynamic aeronautical data- USSP/SDSP/ANSP Procedural interface with ATC -USSP/ANSP ATC/UAS coordination procedures – USSP/ANSP Flight notification procedures -USSP Emergency and contingency procedures – USSP/ANSP Emergency management -USSP/ANSP Emergency alert line – USSP/ANSP Emergency assistance information -USSP/ANSP Strategic de-confliction – USSP Strategic de-confliction – USSP
U3 Dynamic geo-fencing – USSP Dynamic geo-fencing – ANSP/USSP Collaborative Interface with ATC – ANSP/USSP Global air situation monitoring – USSP ATC alert notification -USSP/ANSP Tactical de-confliction -DO/USSP Dynamic capacity management – USSP Airspace capacity monitoring – USSP UAS traffic complexity assessment USSP/ANSP Demand/capacity imbalance detection – USSP/ANSP UTM measures implementation – USSP/ANSP
|
U1 e-Registration – CAA Electronic chip – MNO Drone operator online registration – CAA Drone online registration – CAA Registration enforcement – CAA Registration Authority -CAA e-Identification – MNO Drone Identification – MNO e-identification enforcement – CAA/ANSP Identification Authority – CAA Pre-tactical geo-fencing – MNO Geo-limitation database – ANSP/MNO Drone operator authentication and authorisation – CAA/ANSP
U2 Tactical geo-fencing – MNO Live airspace data feed – USSP/ANSP/MNO Area infringement notification – USSP/ANSP/MNO Flight planning management – USSP/ANSP/MNO Automated FPL validation – USSP/MNO Operations digital authorisation – USSP/MNO Digital NOTAM – USSP/ANSP/SDSP/MNO Weather information – SDSP/MNO Low-altitude wind forecast – SDSP/MNO Actual low-altitude wind info – SDSP/MNO Weather info collection – USSP/MNO Weather hazard alerts – SDSP/USSP/MNO Tracking – MNO/USSP Radio Positioning infrastructure – MNO/USSP Real-time tracking -MNO/USSP Tracking data recording – USSP/MNO Monitoring -USSP/MNO Air situation monitoring – USSP/MNO Flight non-conformance detection – USSP/other Area infringement detection – USSP/other Traffic info multicast- USSP/MNO Alert/Report line – USSP/MNO Drone aeronautical information management -USSP/SDSP/ANSP/MNO UTM-relevant static aeronautical data – USSP/SDSP/ANSP UTM-relevant dynamic aeronautical data- USSP/SDSP/ANSP/MNO Procedural interface with ATC -USSP/ANSP/MNO ATC/UAS coordination procedures – USSP/ANSP/MNO Flight notification procedures -USSP Emergency and contingency procedures – USSP/ANSP/MNO Emergency management -USSP/ANSP/MNO Emergency alert line – USSP/ANSP/MNO Emergency assistance information -USSP/ANSP/MNO Strategic de-confliction – USSP/MNO Strategic de-confliction – USSP/MNO
U3 Dynamic geo-fencing – USSP/MNO Dynamic geo-fencing – USSP/MNO Collaborative Interface with ATC – ANSP/USSP/MNO Global air situation monitoring – USSP/MNO ATC alert notification -USSP/ANSP/MNO Tactical de-confliction -DO/USSP/MNO Dynamic capacity management – USSP/MNO Airspace capacity monitoring – USSP/MNO UAS traffic complexity assessment USSP/ANSP/MNO Demand/capacity imbalance detection – USSP/ANSP/MNO UTM measures implementation – USSP/ANSP |
| Notes: Based on the SESAR U-space service level definitions
Key: CAA – civil aviation authority DO – drone operator MNO – mobile network operator ANSP – air navigation service provider SDSP – Supplemental data service provider USSP – UTM/U-Space service provider ND – Not decided |
|
But there are several challenges before MNOs can adapt their services to the demands of the aviation market. The main one is to convince regulators that MNO service levels in areas such as coverage, latency and back-up procedures are sufficiently robust for UTM operations. Early research[1] suggests that 4G will be sufficient for UTM services especially when they are supported by performance measuring systems which analyse network performance and provide automatic re-routing and deconfliction of drone flights in the event of an outage or interference.
For information on the contents of the report and its implications for the deployment of UTM systems please contact the editor, Philip Butterworth-Hayes at philip@unmannedairspace.info,
[1] https://www.unmannedairspace.info/uncategorized/mobile-phone-network-multi-link-drone-tracking-performance-compared/
(Image: Shutterstock)
