Unmanned Systems Technology 005 | Selex ES Falco UAV | Sense and avoid systems | RCV Engines DF70 | DSEI show report | Fuel cells | CUAV Expo, InterDrone and CUAV Show reports | SLAM

42 Focus | Sense and avoid systems fed into the cloud alongside telemetry data, aviation data from radar and weather data, and this is all combined with a database on the local laws and hazards. The system then sends targeted avoidance instructions directly to the UAS as waypoints or turn rates. To do this, the application programming interface (API) for the network is made available to UAS platform manufacturers to integrate into their designs. The link to the internet can be either directly through a mobile phone modem module on the craft or through the downlink and then to a mobile phone held by the operator. If the operator ignores an alert though, it would still be possible for the network to implement changes directly to avoid collisions. The aim is to support any aircraft, any vendor and any hardware. The network draws on the experience of building cloud-based systems with millions of items for the Internet of Things to provide a system that scales with millions of pieces of real-time data and responds with a latency of only a few milliseconds. This is necessary with relatively fast- moving craft to give time to notify the operator, make a course adjustment, take evasive action or take over the craft. The API allows developers to build robust, internet-scale applications that can provide command and control capabilities to one or more UAS systems, using a common interface. However, it is up to platform developers to integrate this technology into their aircraft, although it is a software upgrade that does not require extra hardware. Conclusion It may seem strange, but the definition of autonomous operation is unclear from a regulatory standpoint. Although many systems, large and small, are heading for autonomous operation, the regulatory environment is confused. Most of the technology is available now, and the last remaining elements for sense and avoid, such as lighter radar systems, will emerge as commercial systems in 2016. The challenge is the confidence of regulators to trust the technology and how the UAS industry works with the regulators to make it a reality sooner rather than later. Acknowledgements The author would like to thank Brandon Suarez at General Atomics GA-AS, Andrew Duggan at Boeing/InSitu, Dr Andrew Deursch at IMSAR, Rod Buchanan at BAE Systems, Olivier Coenen at Qelzal and Richard Parker at Altitude Angel for their help with researching this article. Dec 2015/Jan 2016 | Unmanned Systems Technology Austria AeroSpy Sense & Avoid Technology +43 676 970 6124 www.aerospy.at Australia Insitu Pacific + 61 731 824 000 www.insitu.com Czech Republic ESC Aerospace +420 284 683 784 www.esc-aerospace.com Switzerland FLARM Technology - www.flarm.com UK Altitude Angel +44 118 925 5075 www.altitudeangel.com BAE Systems - www.baesystems.com Barnard Microsystems +44 208 245 6226 www.barnardmicrosystems.com RFEL +44 198 321 6600 www.rfel.com USA Exelis Electronic Systems +1 973 284 2180 www.exelisinc.com General Atomics Aeronautical Systems +1 858 312 2810 www.ga-asi.com IMSAR +1 801 798 8440 www.imsar.com Innovation Integration +1 805 383 8994 www.innovative-dsp.com Insitu + 1 509 493 8600 www.insitu.com Qelzal + 1 650 427 0360 www.qelzal.com RDRTec +1 214 353 8755 www.rdrtec.com SARA +1 714 224 4410  www.sara.com Sierra Nevada +1 775 331 0222 www.sncorp.com SRC +1 315 452 8000 www.srcinc.com Some examples of sense and avoid technology suppliers