Casualty Risk Analysis for Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems Operations

L. Cuomo, G. Guglieri
{"title":"Casualty Risk Analysis for Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems Operations","authors":"L. Cuomo, G. Guglieri","doi":"10.1142/s2301385021500072","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper offers an alternative Casualty Area assessment. This parameter appears in all flying vehicles risk evaluation. This work arises from the intention of contributing to the subject of risk assessment in aviation. All the formulations of the Casualty Area — which will be analyzed in this paper — are tailored for debris with high kinetic energies. These models lead to an overestimation of the risk associated with small drones flight, preventing both their use and the implied operational benefits. The proposed version tailors the small Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (commonly known as drones) falling under the A2 European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) category, C2 class [European Aviation Safety Agency, Civil drones (Unmanned aircraft, 2018), https://www.easa.europa.eu/easa-and-you/civil-drones-rpas , accessed November (2019)], i.e. drones with a mass up to 4 kg. To obtain the new formulation, the authors started with the most used formula, proposed by Montgomery [R. M. Montgomery and J. A. Ward, Casualty Areas from Impacting Inert Debris for People in the Open (Research Triangle Institute, 1995)], used by FAA (Federal Aviation Administration, [Range Safety Group, Common Risk Criteria for National Test Ranges Inert Debris (Range Commanders Council, 2000)] and [Range Safety Group, Common Risk Criteria Standards for National Test Ranges (Range Commanders Council, 2010)]), adopting new hypotheses but following the same process. The results allow a risk formulation more suitable for drones of the above-mentioned size [Range Safety Group, Range Safety Criteria For Unmanned Air Vehicles Supplement (Range Commanders Council, 1999)]. The proposed formulation can be of use for specific regulatory issues. As a matter of fact, many services use small drones: aerial photography during public assemblies, concerts, sporting events, home deliveries, buildings thermal evaluation, to name just a few. The implementation of the present results allows a wider series of operations previously restricted due to the estimation of an incompatible level of risk. In fact, with the new formulation of the Casualty Area, the level of risk is safely lowered, mainly addressing the small dimension drones [European Aviation Safety Agency, Civil drones (Unmanned aircraft), https://www.easa.europa.eu/easa-and-you/civil-drones-rpas , Online accessed November (2019)]. The steps leading to the final formulation derive from a comprehensive analysis, coherent with the guidelines set by FAA and EASA.","PeriodicalId":164619,"journal":{"name":"Unmanned Syst.","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Unmanned Syst.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1142/s2301385021500072","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper offers an alternative Casualty Area assessment. This parameter appears in all flying vehicles risk evaluation. This work arises from the intention of contributing to the subject of risk assessment in aviation. All the formulations of the Casualty Area — which will be analyzed in this paper — are tailored for debris with high kinetic energies. These models lead to an overestimation of the risk associated with small drones flight, preventing both their use and the implied operational benefits. The proposed version tailors the small Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (commonly known as drones) falling under the A2 European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) category, C2 class [European Aviation Safety Agency, Civil drones (Unmanned aircraft, 2018), https://www.easa.europa.eu/easa-and-you/civil-drones-rpas , accessed November (2019)], i.e. drones with a mass up to 4 kg. To obtain the new formulation, the authors started with the most used formula, proposed by Montgomery [R. M. Montgomery and J. A. Ward, Casualty Areas from Impacting Inert Debris for People in the Open (Research Triangle Institute, 1995)], used by FAA (Federal Aviation Administration, [Range Safety Group, Common Risk Criteria for National Test Ranges Inert Debris (Range Commanders Council, 2000)] and [Range Safety Group, Common Risk Criteria Standards for National Test Ranges (Range Commanders Council, 2010)]), adopting new hypotheses but following the same process. The results allow a risk formulation more suitable for drones of the above-mentioned size [Range Safety Group, Range Safety Criteria For Unmanned Air Vehicles Supplement (Range Commanders Council, 1999)]. The proposed formulation can be of use for specific regulatory issues. As a matter of fact, many services use small drones: aerial photography during public assemblies, concerts, sporting events, home deliveries, buildings thermal evaluation, to name just a few. The implementation of the present results allows a wider series of operations previously restricted due to the estimation of an incompatible level of risk. In fact, with the new formulation of the Casualty Area, the level of risk is safely lowered, mainly addressing the small dimension drones [European Aviation Safety Agency, Civil drones (Unmanned aircraft), https://www.easa.europa.eu/easa-and-you/civil-drones-rpas , Online accessed November (2019)]. The steps leading to the final formulation derive from a comprehensive analysis, coherent with the guidelines set by FAA and EASA.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
远程驾驶飞机系统操作的伤亡风险分析
本文提供了另一种伤亡区域评估方法。该参数出现在所有飞行器的风险评估中。这项工作源于对航空风险评估这一主题作出贡献的意图。本文将分析的所有伤亡区公式都是为高动能碎片量身定制的。这些模型导致高估了与小型无人机飞行相关的风险,阻碍了它们的使用和隐含的作战效益。拟议版本针对小型遥控飞机系统(通常称为无人机),属于欧洲航空安全局(EASA) A2类,C2类[欧洲航空安全局,民用无人机(无人驾驶飞机,2018年),https://www.easa.europa.eu/easa-and-you/civil-drones-rpas,于2019年11月获得],即质量不超过4公斤的无人机。为了得到新的公式,作者从Montgomery [R。M. Montgomery和J. A. Ward,《开放环境中冲击惰性碎片造成人员伤亡区域》(三角研究所,1995年),FAA(联邦航空管理局,[靶场安全小组,国家试验靶场惰性碎片共同风险标准(靶场指挥官委员会,2000年)]和[靶场安全小组,国家试验靶场共同风险标准(靶场指挥官委员会,2010年)])采用了新的假设,但遵循了相同的过程。研究结果使风险公式更适合上述尺寸的无人机[靶场安全小组,无人机靶场安全标准补充(靶场指挥官委员会,1999)]。建议的配方可用于特定的监管问题。事实上,许多服务都使用小型无人机:公共集会、音乐会、体育赛事、送货上门、建筑热评估等期间的航空摄影。目前结果的实施使以前由于估计不相容的风险水平而受到限制的一系列更广泛的行动成为可能。事实上,随着伤亡区域的新制定,风险水平被安全降低,主要针对小尺寸无人机[欧洲航空安全局,民用无人机(无人驾驶飞机),https://www.easa.europa.eu/easa-and-you/civil-drones-rpas,在线访问11月(2019年)]。导致最终制定的步骤源自全面分析,符合FAA和EASA制定的指导方针。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Editorial: Special Issue on Perception, Decision and Control of Unmanned Systems Under Complex Conditions Modeling and Quantitative Evaluation Method of Environmental Complexity for Measuring Autonomous Capabilities of Military Unmanned Ground Vehicles Recent Developments in Event-Triggered Control of Nonlinear Systems: An Overview Physical Modeling, Simulation and Validation of Small Fixed-Wing UAV An Improved RRT* UAV Formation Path Planning Algorithm Based on Goal Bias and Node Rejection Strategy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1