F38.02 - Flight Operations

SCOPE
1.1 In this specification, the standard of performance for weather information reports, analyses, and services performed by a weather information provider (WIP) in support of extensible traffic management (xTM) systems, unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) and vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) systems operating from the surface to 5000 ft (1524 m) above ground level (AGL) are addressed.  
1.2 This specification does not define how to report a meteorological aerodrome report (METAR). This specification supports evolving international and the sovereign civil aviation authority (CAA) and air navigation service provider (ANSP) regulations.  
1.3 Relationship to International WIP Standards—One objective of this specification is to harmonize the standard across CAAs internationally to enable subject matter compatibility across standards developed by other standards development organizations (SDOs). The existence of multiple standards for the same subject matter can occur when a region’s regulator requires that a necessary standard be developed by a particular SDO. In these cases, ASTM International may seek to establish a cooperative arrangement with the applicable SDO to ensure consistency between the related standards.  
1.4 This specification provides an initial version to provide guidance to commercial aviation operations including, but not limited to, UAS and VTOL users, for weather measurements and analyses. Research and development activities will continue to inform and lead to modifications to this specification.  
1.5 This specification will not cover the standard of performance for weather forecasts.  
1.6 Units—The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SCOPE
1.1 This specification defines the requirements for the planning, design, and establishment of vertiports intended to service vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) aircraft. These aircraft include, but are not limited to, standard category aircraft, optionally piloted aircraft, and unmanned aircraft. Aircraft not covered by this specification include VTOL aircraft less than 55 lb [25 kg]. In developing these standards, identified types of eVTOL aircraft, for example, Multi-Rotor, Lift & Cruise, Vectored Thrust, Tilt Wing, Tilt Rotor, etc., were considered. Ultimately it is up to the authorities having jurisdiction (AHJ) as to how and to what extent these standards are applied. Vertiports may provide commercial or private services in support of the operation of eVTOL aircraft including, but not limited to, some or all of occupant and cargo transport, air medical, flight instruction, aerial work, aircraft rental, fueling, charging of energy storage devices, battery exchange, hangaring, and maintenance services.  
1.2 This specification is intended to support the design of civil vertiports and vertistops, however, it may also be used as a best practice document for other facilities.  
1.2.1 Vertiport  is a generic reference to the area of land, water, or structure used, or intended to be used, for the landing and takeoff of VTOL aircraft, together with associated buildings and facilities. At this time, aircraft with floats conducting water landings and takeoffs are not included in this specification.  
1.2.2 Vertistop—The same as Vertiport, except that no fueling, defueling, scheduled maintenance, scheduled repairs, or storage of aircraft is permitted. Unscheduled maintenance and repairs to return an aircraft in an AOG (Aircraft on Ground) status to a serviceable status are permissible.  
1.3 This document may present information in either SI units, English Engineering units, or both. The values stated in each system are not necessarily exact equivalents; therefore, to ensure conformance with the standard, each system shall be used independently of the other, and values from the two systems shall not be combined  
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SCOPE
1.1 This specification covers the performance requirements for remote identification (Remote ID) of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS). Remote ID allows governmental and civil identification of UAS for safety, security, and compliance purposes. The objective is to increase UAS remote pilot accountability by removing anonymity while preserving operational privacy for remote pilots, businesses, and their customers. Remote ID is an enabler of enhanced operations such as beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS) operations as well as operations over people.  
1.2 This specification defines message formats, transmission methods, and minimum performance standards for two forms of Remote ID: broadcast and network. Broadcast Remote ID is based on the transmission of radio signals directly from a UAS to receivers in the UAS’s vicinity. Network Remote ID is based on communication by means of the internet from a network Remote ID service provider (Net-RID SP) that interfaces directly or indirectly with the UAS, or with other sources in the case of intent-based network participants.  
1.3 This specification addresses the communications and test requirements of broadcast or network Remote ID, or both, in UAS and Net-RID SP systems.  
1.4 Applicability:  
1.4.1 This specification is applicable to UAS that operate at very low level (VLL) airspace over diverse environments including but not limited to rural, urban, networked, network degraded, and network denied environments, regardless of airspace class.  
1.4.2 This specification neither purports to address UAS operating with approval to use ADS-B or secondary surveillance radar transponders, nor does it purport to solve ID needs of UAS for all operations.  
1.4.3 In particular, this specification does not purport to address identification needs for UAS that are not participating in Remote ID or operators that purposefully circumvent Remote ID.  
1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses after SI units are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.5.1 Units of measurement included in this specification:    
m  
meters  
deg, °  
degrees of latitude and longitude, compass direction  
s  
seconds  
Hz  
Hertz (frequency)  
dBm  
decibel-milliwatts (radio frequency power)  
ppm  
parts per million (radio frequency variation)  
μs  
microseconds  
ms  
milliseconds  
1.6 Table of Contents:    
Title  
Section  
Scope  
1  
Referenced Documents  
2  
Terminology  
3  
Remote ID and Network Interoperability Conceptual Overview  
4  
Performance Requirements  
5  
TEST METHODS  
Scope  
6  
Significance and Use  
7  
Hazards  
8  
Test Units  
9  
Procedure  
10  
Precision and Bias  
11  
Product Marking  
12  
Packaging and Package Marking  
13  
Keywords  
14  
ANNEX A1—Broadcast Authentication Verifier Service  
Annex A1  
ANNEX A2—Network Remote ID Interoperability Requirements, APIs, and Testing  
Annex A2  
ANNEX A3—Tables of Values  
Annex A3  
ANNEX A4—USS-DSS and USS-USS OpenAPI YAML Description  
Annex A4  
ANNEX A5—Number Registrar Management Policy  
Annex A5  
APPENDIX X1—Performance Characteristics  
Appendix X1  
APPENDIX X2—List of Subcommittee Participants and Contributors  
Appendix X2  
APPENDIX X3—Background Information  
Appendix X3  
1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. Some specific hazards statements are given in Section 8 on Hazards.  
1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the D...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
3.1 The general approach to this practice is to serve as an “overlay” of requirements to the ASTM F3411-22a Standard Specification for Remote ID and Tracking by identifying mandatory portions, substituting values as needed, overriding items that may be optional, and providing additional requirements that are beyond the scope of Specification F3411, yet are necessary to provide proper guidance to meet the requirements set forth in Part 89.  
3.2 Furthermore, this practice provides additional details on minimal testing requirements for those submitting a DOC based on this MOC.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice provides a Means of Compliance (MOC) that gives sufficient clarity to the Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) or Broadcast Module manufacturers to produce a compliant Remote ID (RID) System (RIDS) such that submitting a Declaration of Compliance2 (DOC) to this MOC will satisfy the requirements of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 14 CFR Part 89 (Part 89) rule.3 This practice also explains what to expect from aircraft operating in compliance to this MOC.  
1.2 The FAA provided three options to comply with the Remote ID regulations: Standard Remote ID UAS, Remote ID Broadcast Modules, and FAA-recognized identification areas (FRIAs). The scope of this MOC is to cover both Standard RID and RID Broadcast Modules.  
1.3 The FRIA portion of the rule is out of scope since it provides a means to avoid the technical RID requirements by operating within administrative boundaries.  
1.4 Both SI and non-SI units are used in this document. Since this is an aviation standard and it addresses FAA rules, some units are used in preference of being consistent with industry and regulatory norms.  
1.5 Table of Contents:    
Title  
Section  
Scope  
1  
Referenced Documents  
2  
Significance and Use  
3  
Subset of Options in the F3411 Specification Considered  
4  
Requirements and Exceptions from the F3411 Specification  
5  
Alternative Applications of Specification F3411 to Meet Part 89
Requirements  
6  
MOC Requirements Not Covered by the Practice  
7  
Test Methods  
8  
Precision and Bias  
9  
Satisfaction of Rule Requirements  
10  
Keywords  
11  
ANNEX A1—Simulation Option for Accuracy Testing  
Annex A1  
APPENDIX X1—External Device for GCS Location Source Rationale  
Appendix X1  
APPENDIX X2—Power Level Rationale  
Appendix X2  
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
7.1 This specification is intended to be used by USS developers, CAAs, and others to assess USS conformance with this UTM specification.
SCOPE
1.1 This specification is intended to be a global specification providing components that may be used to satisfy requirements expected to be common to many UTM-related regulations. This specification is not intended to comprehensively address all aspects of any particular UTM-related regulation or concept of operations. Similarly, because varying terminology for the same concept is frequently used across different regulations, readers should not expect an exact terminology consistency with any particular UTM-related regulation.  
1.2 This version of the specification is focused on strategic aspects of UAS operations, including strategic conflict detection, aggregate conformance of operations to their operational intents, constraint awareness, and situational awareness in the event of nonconforming or contingent operations. The intention is that this specification will evolve to address increasingly complex strategic aspects of UAS operations and potentially certain tactical aspects of UAS operations.  
1.3 This specification addresses the performance and interoperability requirements, including associated application programming interfaces (APIs), for a set of UTM roles performed by UAS Service Suppliers (USSs) in support of UAS operations.2 Roles are groupings of one or more related UTM services. A competent authority may choose to use the roles defined in this specification in establishing the granularity of authorizations granted to a USS. The roles defined in this specification are:
(1) Strategic Coordination, comprising the Strategic Conflict Detection and Aggregate Operational Intent Conformance Monitoring services;
(2) Conformance Monitoring for Situational Awareness (CMSA);
(3) Constraint Management, comprising the Constraint Management service; and
(4) Constraint Processing, comprising the Constraint Processing service.  
1.4 Section 4, Conceptual Overview, provides a description of each of the services and roles and includes further discussion on their scope.  
1.5 A regulator may choose to require that a USS support a minimum or prescribed set of roles and services and may adopt terminology other than USS for a software system that provides something other than that minimum or prescribed set of roles and services. However, for purposes of this specification, a USS is a system that provides one or more of the UTM services defined in this specification.  
1.6 A USS is not required by this specification to perform all roles or implement all defined services, providing business case flexibility for implementers. A typical USS that supports operators in the planning and execution of UAS operations may implement the Strategic Coordination, Constraint Processing, and CMSA roles. (Note that a USS providing CMSA for a UAS operation is required to also provide Strategic Coordination for the operation.) However, other implementations more limited in scope are possible. For example, a USS may implement only the Constraint Management role and be intended for use only by authorized constraint providers; or, a USS may implement only the Constraint Processing role to provide general airspace awareness to users independent of planning UAS flights. USSs may also provide additional, value-added capabilities and still be compliant with this specification as long as the value-added capabilities do not conflict with the services defined in this specification, and the implementation of services defined in this specification conforms to the applicable requirements.  
1.7 A USS may also support other UTM roles such as Remote ID and airspace access (for example, the FAA’s LAANC), specified in other documents.  
1.8 This specification addresses aspects common to all roles and services, such as Discovery and Synchronization Services (DSS), security, aud...

SCOPE
1.1 This specification establishes the standard practice for the maintenance and continued airworthiness of a lightweight unmanned aircraft system (UAS).  
1.2 At a minimum, a UAS is defined as a system composed of the unmanned aircraft and all required subsystems, control station, all required crew members, command and control (C2) links, and any required launch and recovery equipment.  
1.3 The intended use for this specification is for civil aviation authority (CAA), self-, or third-party determinations of continued airworthiness for UAS. This specification provides the core requirements for continued airworthiness of lightweight UAS or for certain CAA operational approvals using risk-based categories, or both. Additional requirements are envisioned to address the requirements for expanded operations and characteristics not addressed by this specification.  
1.4 This specification is intended to support aircraft developed in accordance with Specifications F2910, F3002, F3005, and F3298.  
1.5 This specification is intended to support UAS operations. It is assumed that the risk of UAS will vary based on concept of operations, environment, and other variables. The fact that there are no human beings onboard the UAS may reduce or eliminate some hazards and risks.  
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
3.1 This practice is written to preclude damage or injury to property and personnel in the event of an unplanned landing by an unmanned aircraft at an airfield not equipped or trained to handle that type of aircraft and to prevent unintentional damage to the aircraft once it lands. It is intended for use by unmanned aircraft equipment designers, procedures developers, and ground personnel.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice identifies and describes equipage and procedures for safely handling unmanned aircraft forced to recover at alternate or diversionary airfields where personnel trained in recovering that type of aircraft may not be present. It is intended to apply to fixed-wing unmanned aircraft conducting non-visual line-of-sight operations. It is intended to establish common locations, labeling, and functions of equipment necessary to safely power down the aircraft without damaging it and common procedures for untrained personnel to follow to contact the owner of the aircraft. It addresses mission planning procedures, automated functions, and manual functions/handling procedures in the preflight, in-flight, and post-flight phases, respectively.  
1.2 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 This practice is written for all sUAS seeking permission to operate BVLOS (E) or BVLOS, or both, in airspace authorized by a CAA.  
4.2 It is assumed that the maximum weight, altitude, and airspeed of an sUAS will be specified by a CAA. However, unless otherwise specified by a nation’s CAA, this practice applies to sUA that:  
4.2.1 Have a maximum takeoff gross weight of less than 55 lb (25 kg), including everything that is on board or otherwise attached to the aircraft, and  
4.2.2 Are remotely piloted (that is, flown without the possibility of direct human intervention from within or on the aircraft).
SCOPE
1.1 Compliance with this practice is recommended as one means of seeking approval from a civil aviation authority (CAA) to operate a small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS) beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS). Any regulatory application of this practice to sUAS and other unmanned aircraft systems (UASs) is at the discretion of the appropriate CAA.  
1.2 Units—The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Use—This practice is intended for use by parties who desire access to the national, or international, airspace as regulated by their respective CAA(s) either for a vehicle design (airworthiness) or a vehicle’s use (operational approval). In this practice, it is recognized the varying levels of complexity, need for risk assessment(s), and due diligence that should be determined in an ongoing dialogue between the CAA and the applicant. Users should consider their requirements, the purpose that the ORA is to serve, and their risk acceptance level before undertaking the ORA. Use of this practice does not preclude other initiatives or processes to identify hazardous conditions or assess and mitigate associated risks.  
5.2 Risk Reduced, not Eliminated—No ORA can eliminate all risk or uncertainty with regard to operations. Preparation of an ORA in accordance with this practice is intended to reduce, but may not necessarily completely eliminate, the risk of an operation in which system complexity is minimal, the operation is conducted in a lower risk environment, and the likelihood for harm to people or property, though present, is reduced to an acceptable level. As mission complexity increases, the operational environment may become less risk tolerant. For example, as the kinetic energy associated with the aircraft increases, more complex assessment/analysis tools and greater time may be required to conduct the ORA.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice focuses on preparing operational risk assessments (ORAs) to be used for supporting small unmanned aircraft systems (sUAS) (aircraft under 55 lb (25 kg)) design, airworthiness, and subsequent operational applications to the civil aviation authority (CAA).  
1.2 It is expected that manufacturers and developers of larger/higher energy sUAS designs, intended to operate in controlled airspace over populated areas, will adopt many of the existing manned aircraft standards in use. These include standards such as SAE ARP4754A and ARP4761, which prescribe a “design for safety” top-down design approach to ensure the sUAS designs can reasonably meet more stringent qualitative and quantitative safety requirements. The ORA, however, remains the same for all risk profiles and will be a part of any sUAS operation.  
1.3 In mitigating and preventing incidents and accidents, it is understood that people generally do not seek to cause damage or injure others, and therefore, malicious acts are beyond the scope of this practice.  
1.4 As part of the ORA, the applicant should clearly understand and be able to articulate their intended mission for purposes of assessing safety and providing information to regulators. This documentation of a sUAS operation (mission, or set of missions) is what many refer to as a concept of operations (CONOPS).  
1.5 This practice is intended primarily for sUAS applicants seeking approval or certification for airworthiness or operations from their respective CAA, though sUAS manufacturers may consider this practice, along with other system safety design standards, as appropriate to identify sUAS design and operational requirements needed to mitigate hazards.  
1.6 Units—The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SCOPE
1.1 This specification covers the performance requirements for remote identification (Remote ID) of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS). Remote ID allows governmental and civil identification of UAS for safety, security, and compliance purposes. The objective is to increase UAS remote pilot accountability by removing anonymity while preserving operational privacy for remote pilots, businesses, and their customers. Remote ID is an enabler of enhanced operations such as beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS) operations as well as operations over people.  
1.2 This specification defines message formats, transmission methods, and minimum performance standards for two forms of Remote ID: broadcast and network. Broadcast Remote ID is based on the transmission of radio signals directly from a UAS to receivers in the UAS’s vicinity. Network Remote ID is based on communication by means of the internet from a network Remote ID service provider (Net-RID SP) that interfaces directly or indirectly with the UAS, or with other sources in the case of intent-based network participants.  
1.3 This specification addresses the communications and test requirements of broadcast or network Remote ID, or both, in UAS and Net-RID SP systems.  
1.4 Applicability:  
1.4.1 This specification is applicable to UAS that operate at very low level (VLL) airspace over diverse environments including but not limited to rural, urban, networked, network degraded, and network denied environments, regardless of airspace class.  
1.4.2 This specification neither purports to address UAS operating with approval to use ADS-B or secondary surveillance radar transponders, nor does it purport to solve ID needs of UAS for all operations.  
1.4.3 In particular, this specification does not purport to address identification needs for UAS that are not participating in Remote ID or operators that purposefully circumvent Remote ID.  
1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses after SI units are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.5.1 Units of measurement included in this specification:    
m  
meters  
deg, °  
degrees of latitude and longitude, compass direction  
s  
seconds  
Hz  
Hertz (frequency)  
dBm  
decibel-milliwatts (radio frequency power)  
ppm  
parts per million (radio frequency variation)  
μs  
microseconds  
ms  
milliseconds  
1.6 Table of Contents:    
Title  
Section  
Scope  
1  
Referenced Documents  
2  
Terminology  
3  
Remote ID and Network Interoperability Conceptual Overview  
4  
Performance Requirements  
5  
TEST METHODS  
Scope  
6  
Significance and Use  
7  
Hazards  
8  
Test Units  
9  
Procedure  
10  
Precision and Bias  
11  
Product Marking  
12  
Packaging and Package Marking  
13  
Keywords  
14  
ANNEX A1—Broadcast Authentication Verifier Service  
Annex A1  
ANNEX A2—Network Remote ID Interoperability Requirements, APIs, and Testing  
Annex A2  
ANNEX A3—Tables of Values  
Annex A3  
ANNEX A4—USS-DSS and USS-USS OpenAPI YAML Description  
Annex A4  
ANNEX A5—Number Registrar Management Policy  
Annex A5  
APPENDIX X1—Performance Characteristics  
Appendix X1  
APPENDIX X2—List of Subcommittee Participants and Contributors  
Appendix X2  
APPENDIX X3—Background Information  
Appendix X3  
1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. Some specific hazards statements are given in Section 8 on Hazards.  
1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the D...

SCOPE
1.1 This specification covers the performance requirements for remote identification (Remote ID) of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS). Remote ID allows governmental and civil identification of UAS for safety, security, and compliance purposes. The objective is to increase UAS remote pilot accountability by removing anonymity while preserving operational privacy for remote pilots, businesses, and their customers. Remote ID is an enabler of enhanced operations such as beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS) operations as well as operations over people.  
1.2 This specification defines message formats, transmission methods, and minimum performance standards for two forms of Remote ID: broadcast and network. Broadcast Remote ID is based on the transmission of radio signals directly from a UAS to receivers in the UAS’s vicinity. Network Remote ID is based on communication by means of the internet from a network Remote ID service provider (Net-RID SP) that interfaces directly or indirectly with the UAS, or with other sources in the case of non-equipped network participants.  
1.3 This specification addresses the communications and test requirements of broadcast or network Remote ID, or both, in UAS and Net-RID SP systems.  
1.4 Applicability:  
1.4.1 This specification is applicable to UAS that operate at very low level (VLL) airspace over diverse environments including but not limited to rural, urban, networked, network degraded, and network denied environments, regardless of airspace class.  
1.4.2 This specification neither purports to address UAS operating with approval to use ADS-B or secondary surveillance radar transponders, nor does it purport to solve ID needs of UAS for all operations.  
1.4.3 In particular, this specification does not purport to address identification needs for UAS that are not participating in Remote ID or operators that purposefully circumvent Remote ID.  
1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses after SI units are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.5.1 Units of measurement included in this specification:    
m  
meters  
deg, °  
degrees of latitude and longitude, compass direction  
s  
seconds  
Hz  
Hertz (frequency)  
dBm  
decibel-milliwatts (radio frequency power)  
ppm  
parts per million (radio frequency variation)  
μs  
microseconds  
ms  
milliseconds  
1.6 Table of Contents:    
Title  
Section  
Scope  
1  
Referenced Documents  
2  
Terminology  
3  
Remote ID and Network Interoperability Conceptual Overview  
4  
Performance Requirements  
5  
TEST METHODS  
Scope  
6  
Significance and Use  
7  
Hazards  
8  
Test Units  
9  
Procedure  
10  
Precision and Bias  
11  
Product Marking  
12  
Packaging and Package Marking  
13  
Keywords  
14  
ANNEX A1—Broadcast Authentication Verifier Service  
Annex A1  
ANNEX A2—Network Remote ID Interoperability Requirements, APIs, and Testing  
Annex A2  
ANNEX A3—Tables of Values  
Annex A3  
ANNEX A4—USS-DSS and USS-USS OpenAPI YAML Description  
Annex A4  
APPENDIX X1—Performance Characteristics  
Appendix X1  
APPENDIX X2—List of Subcommittee Participants and Contributors  
Appendix X2  
APPENDIX X3—Background Information  
Appendix X3  
1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. Some specific hazards statements are given in Section 8 on Hazards.  
1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International S...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 This practice is written for all sUAS seeking permission to operate EVLOS or BVLOS, or both, in airspace authorized by a CAA.  
4.2 It is assumed that the maximum weight, altitude, and airspeed of an sUAS will be specified by a CAA. However, unless otherwise specified by a nation’s CAA, this practice applies to sUA that:  
4.2.1 Have a maximum takeoff gross weight of less than 55 lb (25 kg), including everything that is on board or otherwise attached to the aircraft, and  
4.2.2 Are remotely piloted (that is, flown without the possibility of direct human intervention from within or on the aircraft).
SCOPE
1.1 Compliance with this practice is recommended as one means of seeking approval from a civil aviation authority (CAA) to operate a small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS) to fly extended visual line of sight (EVLOS) or beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS), or both. Any regulatory application of this practice to sUAS and other unmanned aircraft systems (UASs) is at the discretion of the appropriate CAA.  
1.2 Units—The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SCOPE
1.1 This specification establishes the standard practice for the maintenance and continued airworthiness of sUAS.  
1.2 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
This practice is written to preclude damage or injury to property and personnel in the event of an unplanned landing by an unmanned aircraft at an airfield not equipped or trained to handle that type of aircraft and to prevent unintentional damage to the aircraft once it lands. It is intended for use by unmanned aircraft equipment designers, procedures developers, and ground personnel.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice identifies and describes equipage and procedures for safely handling unmanned aircraft forced to recover at alternate or diversionary airfields where personnel trained in recovering that type of aircraft may not be present. It is intended to apply to fixed-wing unmanned aircraft conducting non-visual line-of-sight operations. It is intended to establish common locations, labeling, and functions of equipment necessary to safely power down the aircraft without damaging it and common procedures for untrained personnel to follow to contact the owner of the aircraft. It addresses mission planning procedures, automated functions, and manual functions/handling procedures in the preflight, in-flight, and post-flight phases, respectively.

SCOPE
1.1 This terminology standard identifies and defines important concepts and terms related to unmanned air vehicle systems. It is intended to establish the boundaries and characteristics that will guide the development of other standards for the committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
Safe operation of the unmanned aircraft is of the primary importance to the unmanned aircraft industry and for successful integration of unmanned aircraft with manned aircraft in civil airspace. Operators and pilots-in-command of unmanned aircraft systems shall comply with applicable Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR Part 43, 14 CFR Part 71, 14 CFR Part 73, 14 CFR Part 91, 14 CFR Part 93, and 14 CFR Part 99). This standard includes the minimum additional methods that should be followed by unmanned aircraft system operators, including pilots-in-command, on every visual range flight to ensure the safe operation of the aircraft and safety of people and property in the air and on the ground. This visual range flight operation standard shall be used in conjunction with appropriate unmanned aircraft system airworthiness and pilot qualification standards.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice prescribes guidelines that govern the visual flight operation of unmanned aircraft systems in civil airspace in order to provide for the safe integration of unmanned aircraft flight operations with manned aircraft flight operations.
1.2 This practice applies to those operations conducted for civil purposes other than sport or recreation that remain within the visual range of the pilot in command (see Terminology F 2395 for a definition of "visual range").
1.3 This practice complies with the known rules, regulations, and public law available at the time of its publication. Should any conflict with a rule, regulation, or public law arise, the user must comply with rule and should notify ASTM of the conflict.
This practice only prescribes accepted methods for visual range flight operation of unmanned aircraft systems.
This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
WITHDRAWN RATIONALE
This practice prescribed guidelines that govern the visual flight operation of unmanned aircraft systems in civil airspace in order to provide for the safe integration of unmanned aircraft flight operations with manned aircraft flight operations.
Formerly under the jurisdiction of Committee F38 on Unmanned Aircraft Systems, this practice was withdrawn in July 2016 in accordance with section 10.5.3.1 of the Regulations Governing ASTM Technical Committees, which requires that standards shall be updated by the end of the eighth year since the last approval date.

SCOPE
1.1 This terminology covers important concepts and terms related to unmanned aircraft systems. It is intended to establish the boundaries and characteristics that will guide the development of other standards for the committee.
WITHDRAWN RATIONALE
This terminology covers important concepts and terms related to unmanned aircraft systems. It is intended to establish the boundaries and characteristics that will guide the development of other standards for the committee.
Formerly under the jurisdiction of Committee F38 on Unmanned Aircraft Systems, this terminology was withdrawn in May 2014 because it is no longer relevant to the industry.