F38 - Unmanned Aircraft Systems

SCOPE
1.1 This specification covers the airworthiness requirements for the design of light unmanned aircraft systems. This specification defines the baseline verification requirements for an unmanned aircraft system (UAS).  
1.2 As a minimum, a UAS is defined as a system composed of the unmanned aircraft and all required on-board subsystems, payload, control station, other required off-board subsystems, any required launch and recovery equipment, all required crew members, and command and control (C2) links between UA and the control station.  
1.3 The intent is for this standard of practice for CAA, self- or third-party determinations of airworthiness for UAS. This specification provides the core requirements for airworthiness certification of lightweight (UAS) for certain CAA operational approvals using risk-based categories. 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 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. However, at the discretion of the CAA, this specification may be applied to other UAS operations.  
1.5 Units—The values in Imperial units are to be regarded as the standard. The values in SI are for information only.  
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.

SCOPE
1.1 This specification defines minimum performance requirements for Surveillance supplemental data service providers (SDSPs) and associated equipment and services. This specification also defines requirements on users of the Surveillance SDSP’s services. Surveillance SDSPs may provide aircraft track information to Detect and Avoid (DAA) systems and situational awareness tools to enable beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS) UAS operations and support VLOS operations.
FIG. 1 Scope of Standard and Flow of Data  
1.2 The expected operating environment is low- to medium-risk airspace (equivalent to Joint Authorities for Rulemaking of Unmanned Systems Specific Operations Risk Assessment (JARUS SORA) ARC-b and ARC-c airspace, respectively). It is generally intended to cover operations below 10 000 ft AGL, and specifically operations below 1200 ft AGL.  
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.

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.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 The purpose of this standard practice is to provide the minimum requirements for the conduct of compliance audits.  
4.2 The intended use of this practice is to provide a basis for an internal or external entity to develop an audit program. An audit program defines specific requirements for the execution of audits for a particular objective. An example of an audit program would be an external (third party) audit of UAS manufacturer’s quality assurance system.  
4.3 Compliance to this practice would ensure that audit programs and those who develop and execute them are following a consensus set of minimum requirements.  
4.4 This practice does not mandate either internal or external audits.  
4.5 An auditing entity cannot request or approve an audit.  
4.6 Other Audit Criteria—Other audit criteria may be included in the audit scope if specified in the audit plan. Examples include safety, technical, operational, and management requirements. Items that are outside the scope of auditable criteria may be submitted as observations for possible resolution. However, these are not binding and are not mandatory.  
4.7 Additional Services—Additional services are outside the scope of an audit objective. Examples of such services are consultation to resolve negative or open findings or any other service where the auditing entity conducts an activity other than an audit for the audited entity.  
4.8 Compliance Assurance—An audit is only an indicator of the compliance health of the facility or organization, or both, during only the period under review and therefore has limited compliance assurance and is not assumed to be exhaustive.  
4.9 Level of Review is Variable—The audit scope may vary to meet different audit objectives. For example, the audit scope may include only selected audit criteria, selected period under review, or selected portions of a facility or organization.
SCOPE
1.1 This standard practice establishes the minimum set of requirements for auditing programs, methods, and systems, the responsibilities for all parties involved, and qualifications for entities conducting audits against ASTM standards on Unmanned Aircraft Systems. This document has been purposefully designed within the broader context of the Committee F38 library. Although the original source materials for the content presented here were intended to function as standalone documents, the committee has consciously removed any redundant information in favor of adopting a referential "single-source-of-truth" approach. Consequently, when applying this standard, it is essential to consider and integrate all relevant Committee F38 standards to ensure its comprehensive and accurate implementation.  
1.2 When intending to utilize the information provided in this document as a Means of Compliance for operational or design approval, or both, it is crucial to consult with the respective oversight authority (for example, CAA) regarding its acceptable use and application. To find out which oversight authorities have accepted this standard (in whole or in part) as an acceptable Means of Compliance to their regulatory requirements (hereinafter "the Rules"), please refer to the Committee F38 webpage (www.ASTM.org/COMMITTEE/F38.htm).  
1.3 This practice provides requirements to enable consistent and structured examination of objective evidence for compliance that is beneficial for the UAS industry and its consumers. It is the intent of this practice to provide the necessary minimum requirements for organizations to develop audit programs and procedures.  
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 internationa...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 This practice establishes the minimum set of requirements for an independent audit program for unmanned aircraft system operators. The intended use is to provide minimum requirements for an initial assessment of operators bringing a new aircraft model or service to market, or for periodic review of an existing operator’s operations.  
4.2 Compliance to this practice would ensure that the audit program and those who execute it meet the consensus set of minimum requirements and qualifications.  
4.3 This practice does not mandate operator independent audits.  
4.4 Independent audits are to be conducted only at the request of the operator or the relevant CAA. This does not preclude an independent audit at the request of a court of law or arbitrator.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice establishes a minimum set of requirements for an Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Operator Independent Audit Program in compliance with Practice F3365. This document has been purposefully designed within the broader context of the Committee F38 library. Although the original source materials for the content presented here were intended to function as standalone documents, the committee has consciously removed any redundant information in favor of adopting a referential "single-source-of-truth" approach. Consequently, when applying this standard, it is essential to consider and integrate all relevant Committee F38 standards to ensure its comprehensive and accurate implementation.  
1.2 When intending to utilize the information provided in this document as a Means of Compliance for operational or design approval, or both, it is crucial to consult with the respective oversight authority (for example, CAA) regarding its acceptable use and application. To find out which oversight authorities have accepted this standard (in whole or in part) as an acceptable Means of Compliance to their regulatory requirements (hereinafter "the Rules"), please refer to the Committee F38 webpage (www.ASTM.org/COMMITTEE/F38.htm).  
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.

SCOPE
1.1 This specification provides the minimum requirements for an Unmanned Aircraft Flight Manual (UFM) for an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) designed, manufactured, and operated in the light UAS category as defined by a Civil Aviation Authority (CAA). Depending on the size and complexity of the UAS, an UFM may also contain the instruction for maintenance and continuing airworthiness for owner / operator authorized maintenance. This document has been purposefully designed within the broader context of the Committee F38 library. Although the original source materials for the content presented here were intended to function as standalone documents, the committee has consciously removed any redundant information in favor of adopting a referential "single-source-of-truth" approach. Consequently, when applying this standard, it is essential to consider and integrate all relevant Committee F38 standards to ensure its comprehensive and accurate implementation.  
1.2 When intending to utilize the information provided in this document as a Means of Compliance for operational or design approval, or both, it is crucial to consult with the respective oversight authority (for example, CAA) regarding its acceptable use and application. To find out which oversight authorities have accepted this standard (in whole or in part) as an acceptable Means of Compliance to their regulatory requirements (hereinafter "the Rules"), please refer to the Committee F38 webpage (www.ASTM.org/COMMITTEE/F38.htm).  
1.3 This specification defines the UFM information that shall be provided by the manufacturer of a UAS as part of the initial sale or transfer to an end user.  
1.4 This specification applies to a UAS seeking a CAA approval, in the form of airworthiness certificates, type certificates, flight permits, or other like documentation as a UAS, in the configuration specified in the UFM delivered with the system.  
1.5 Any modifications that invalidate or otherwise affect the accuracy of UFM operating instructions shall be approved by the manufacturer and communicated to the regulatory authority in the certificate / permit application.  
1.6 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 The purpose of this guide is to provide a standardized means of facilitating Remote Pilot training. The guide should be used by all individuals and agencies that train such persons.  
4.2 Successful completion of this training course neither constitutes nor implies certification or licensure from the CAA.  
4.3 This guide is intended to provide guidance to:  
4.3.1 Individuals, who are currently manned pilots (that is, FAA Part 61 or EASA FCL certificate holders), interested in pursuing academic programs and professional opportunities as a remote pilot,  
4.3.2 Individuals, who are currently remote pilots (that is, FAA under Part 107, CASA RePL under Part 101) who want to voluntarily comply with a higher standard, and  
4.3.3 Public agencies that self-certify remote pilots interested in developing unmanned aircraft systems programs.  
4.4 This guide describes required education, training, and continuing professional development for those performing as professional remote pilot. Remote Pilot courses that do not include all of the knowledge and skill objectives of this guide may not be referred to as meeting this guide.
SCOPE
1.1 This guide is intended for two distinct readers: educators who wish to develop curricula and training courses and individual pilots wishing to raise their knowledge level for particular flight operations. The guide describes the knowledge, skills, and abilities required to safely operate unmanned aircraft for commercial purposes. A Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) may, at their discretion, use this guide to aid the development of existing or future regulations. This guide addresses powered fixed-wing, vertical-take-off and lift and rotorcraft UAS and not other potential unmanned aircraft categories (for example, glider, lighter-than-air, etc.). This guide has been purposefully designed within the broader context of the ASTM F38 library. Although the original source materials for the content presented here were intended to function as standalone documents, the committee has consciously removed any redundant information in favor of adopting a referential “single-source-of-truth” approach. Consequently, when applying this standard, it is essential to consider and integrate all relevant ASTM F38 standards to ensure its comprehensive and accurate implementation.  
1.2 When intending to utilize the information provided in this guide as a means of compliance for operational and/or design approval, it is crucial to consult with the respective oversight authority (for example, CAA) regarding its acceptable use and application. To find out which oversight authorities have accepted this standard (in whole or in part) as an acceptable means of compliance to their regulatory requirements (hereinafter “the Rules”), please refer to the ASTM F38 webpage (www.ASTM.org/COMMITTEE/F38.htm).  
1.3 An unmanned aircraft system (UAS) is composed of the unmanned aircraft and all required on-board subsystems, payloads, control station, other required off-board subsystems, any required launch and recovery equipment, all required crew members, and command and control (C2) links between UA and the control station.  
1.4 This guide provides fundamental general knowledge, task performance and knowledge, and activities and functions for remote pilots of lightweight UAS (but not necessarily limited to UAs under 55 lb Gross Take Off Weight) or for certain CAA operational approvals using risk-based categories. Flight operations outside the scope of this guide require additional knowledge, experience, and training.  
1.5 This guide can be used to evaluate a training course outline and syllabus to determine when its content includes the topics necessary for training individuals to be proficient and competent remote pilot personnel. Likewise, this guide may be used to evaluate an existing training program to see when it meets the requirements in this guide.  
1.6 A person meeting the requirem...

SCOPE
1.1 This specification applies to uncrewed aircraft (UA) with a maximum dimension (for example, wingspan, disc diameter) ≤25 ft, operating at airspeeds below 100 kts, and of any configuration or category. It is meant to be applied in a “lower risk” [low- and medium-risk airspace as described by Joint Authorities for Rulemaking on Unmanned Systems (JARUS)] airspace environment with assumed infrequent encounters with crewed aircraft; this is typically in classes G and E airspace [below about 1200 ft above ground level (AGL)], Class B, C, D (below approximately 400 ft to 500 ft AGL) below obstacle clearance surface (FAA Order 8260.3, as amended) or within low altitude authorization and notification capability (LAANC) designated areas below the altitude specified in the facility map.  
1.1.1 Traffic encountered is expected to be mixed cooperative and non-cooperative traffic, instrument flight rules (IFR) and visual flight rules (VFR), and to mostly include low-altitude aircraft—including rotorcraft, small general aviation, crop dusters, ultralights, and light sport aircraft, but not transport category aircraft.  
1.1.2 This includes, but is not limited to, airspace where nearly all aircraft are required2 to be cooperative (for example, within the Mode C veil in the United States).  
1.2 Ultimate determination of applicability will be governed by the appropriate civil aviation authority (CAA).  
1.3 This specification assumes no air traffic control (ATC) separation services are provided to the UA.  
1.4 While some architectures may have limitations due to external conditions, this specification applies to daytime and nighttime, as well as visual meteorological conditions (VMC) and instrument meteorological conditions (IMC). The system integrator shall document system limitation (that is, due to operating environments and/or minimum altitudes at which the air picture is no longer valid).  
1.5 This specification is applicable to the avoidance of crewed aircraft by uncrewed aircraft systems (UAS), not UA-to-UA or terrain/obstacle/airspace avoidance (both to be addressed in future efforts). Likewise, birds or natural hazard (for example, weather, clouds) avoidance requirements are not addressed.  
1.6 This specification does not define a specific detect and avoid (DAA) architecture3 and is architecture agnostic. It will, however, define specific safety performance thresholds for a DAA system to meet in order to ensure safe operation.  
1.7 This specification addresses the definitions and methods for demonstrating compliance to this specification, and the many considerations (for example, detection range, required timeline to meet well clear, and near mid-air collision (NMAC) safety targets) affecting DAA system integration.  
1.8 The specification highlights how different aspects of the system are designed and interrelated, and how they affect the greater UAS system-of-systems to enable a developer to make informed decisions within the context of their specific UAS application(s).  
1.9 It is expected this specification will be used by diverse contributors or actors including, but not limited to:  
1.9.1 DAA system designers and integrators,  
1.9.2 Sensor suppliers,  
1.9.3 UA developers,  
1.9.4 Control Station designers,  
1.9.5 UAS service suppliers, and  
1.9.6 Flight control designers.  
1.10 Except for DAA system integrators for whom all the “shalls” in this specification apply, not all aspects of this specification are relevant to all actors/contributors. In some instances, the actor most likely to satisfy a requirement has been identified in brackets after the requirement; this is for informative purposes only and does not indicate that only that actor may fulfill that requirement. Where not specified, the system integrator/applicant is assumed to be the primary actor; in all cases, the system integrator/applicant is responsible for all requirements and may choose to delegate requirements as ...

SCOPE
1.1 This specification defines the requirements for training and the development of training manuals for the unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) operator.  
1.2 The specification addresses the requirements or best practices, or both, for documentation and organization of a professional operator (that is, for compensation and hire) for the purposes of internal training programs and for programs offered to the general public.  
1.3 This specification supports professional entities that will receive operator certification by a CAA, and provide standards of practice for self- or third-party audit of operators of UAS.  
1.4 The standard case study used to develop this specification focused on operators of light UAS (below 1320 lb/600 kg as defined by EASA), but the specification may be applied to larger aircraft for using other methods of classification (that is, risk based classes and pilot privileges classes).  
1.5 Training manuals that do not include all the minimum requirements of this specification may not be referred to as meeting this specification.  
1.6 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as 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 terminology standard covers definitions of terms and concepts related to unmanned aircraft systems (UAS). It is intended to encourage the consistent use of terminology throughout all ASTM unmanned aircraft system standards and is intended to complement F3060 Standard Terminology for Aircraft. Terms already included in Terminology F3060 are not duplicated here.  
1.2 A definition adapted from a particular standard within the ASTM F38 collection of standards is not limited to use within only those standards.  
1.3 Additional terms specific to a given standard may be defined solely within that standard and not included here.  
1.4 Units—The definitions of units will be as defined in NIST SP 330, and will not be duplicated in this document. NIST SP 330 is available on the internet.2 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. 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.  
1.5 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.  
1.6 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.

ABSTRACT
This standard specifies the requirements for batteries used in small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (sUAS). It covers the standard terminology for sUAS as well as the requirements with respect to cells, mechanical design and assembly, electrical design, and maintenance of the pack and the recording of maintenance data.
SCOPE
1.1 This standard defines the requirements for batteries used in small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (sUAS).  
1.2 This standard does not define requirements for the systems in which sUAS battery packs may be utilized.  
1.3 This standard is subordinate to Specification F2910.  
1.4 If allowed by a nation’s GAA, certain sUAS may be exempt from this standard and may use commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) batteries in non-safety-critical payloads (lithium chemistries may not be exempted). Air transport regulations still shall be adhered to when air transport is used for COTS cells or batteries in bulk.  
1.5 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.  
1.6 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.

ABSTRACT
This specification establishes the design, construction, and test requirements for a small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS). It is intended for all sUAS that are permitted to operate over a defined area and in airspace authorized by a nation's governing aviation authority (GAA). Unless otherwise specified by a nation’s GAA, this specification applies only to UA that have a maximum takeoff gross weight of 55 lb/25 kg or less.
SCOPE
1.1 This specification defines the design, construction, and test requirements for a small unmanned aircraft system (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, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.3 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.

ABSTRACT
This specification provides a consensus standard for an application to a nation's governing aviation authority (GAA) for a permit to operate a small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS) for commercial or public use purposes. It is intended for all sUAS that are allowed to operate over a defined area and in airspace authorized by a nation's GAA. Unless otherwise specified by a nation's GAA, this specification applies only to UA that have a maximum gross takeoff weight of 25 kg (55 lb) or less. This specification covers general command and control (C2) requirements, C2 system spectrum requirements, C2 link requirements, UA requirements, and fly-away functionality.
SCOPE
1.1 This specification is provided as a consensus standard in support of an application to a nation’s governing aviation authority (GAA) for a permit to operate a small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS) for commercial or public use purposes.  
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, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.3 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...

SCOPE
1.1 This specification covers the design and manufacture requirements for deployable parachutes of small unmanned aircraft (sUA). This specification defines the design, fabrication, and test requirements of installable, deployable parachute recovery systems (PRS) that are designed to be integrated into an sUA to lessen the impact energy of the system should the sUA fail to sustain normal, stable safe flight.  
1.1.1 Compliance with this specification is intended to support an applicant in obtaining permission from a civil aviation authority (CAA) to fly an sUA over people.  
1.1.2 Parachute recovery systems that do not include all the minimum requirements of Section 5 and Section 6 of this specification shall not be referred to as meeting this specification.  
1.2 This specification is applicable to the design, construction, and test of deployable parachute recovery systems that may be incorporated into the system or structure, or both, of sUA seeking civil aviation authority (CAA) approval in the form of technical standard orders (TSO), flight certificates, flight waivers, flight permits, or other like documentation.  
1.3 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.  
1.4 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.

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.

SCOPE
1.1 Applicability:  
1.1.1 This specification identifies the industry standards that have been determined by consensus to demonstrate compliance to the requirements (“the Rules”) for Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS).  
1.1.2 This specification does not apply to UAS carrying passengers or crew.  
1.1.3 The following are outside the scope of this Design and Construction Specification: Vertical Takeoff and Landing (VTOL) or Hybrid Aircraft, Passenger or Crew Carrying UAS, Seaplanes or Amphibians, UAS Certified for Acrobatic Flight, Lightweight UAS that fall under Specification F3298, Recreational UAS (Model Aircraft), Detect and Avoid Systems, Control Station Specifics to Human Factors, Building Codes that apply to Ground Control Stations, and Command and Control Link.  
1.1.4 Only standards that are considered mature enough for general application to certification projects and have been found acceptable by committee consensus to propose to the civil aviation authorities (CAAs) for acceptance as a Means of Compliance (MoC) to their Rules are included.  
1.1.5 In the event that a particular CAA’s requirements are not harmonized with the other CAA’s requirements, the standards will be written to include the non-harmonized requirements as well as the harmonized requirements with the applicability defined in the standard.  
1.2 Civil Aviation Authorities—CAAs may accept a specific revision of this specification as an acceptable MoC to their requirements. Acceptance and applicability as an MoC to the CAA’s airworthiness rules remains the decision of the respective CAAs. CAAs may accept this specification, with or without limitations as defined in their specification acceptance document. For information on which CAAs have accepted these standards (in whole or in part) as an acceptable MoC to their Rules, refer to the ASTM Committee F44 (General Aviation), ASTM Committee F38 (Unmanned Aerial Systems) or ASTM Committee F39 (Aircraft Systems) webpages (www.astm.org/COMMITTEE/F44.htm, www.astm.org/COMMITTEE/F38.htm, www.astm.org/COMMITTEE/F39.htm), which include CAA website links.  
1.3 Applicant Responsibility—The applicant must seek individual guidance from their respective CAA concerning the use of this specification and any referenced Specifications, Practices, Test Methods, or Guides to show compliance to the CAA rules. Alternatively, an applicant may propose an MoC other than those included in this specification, but it is their responsibility to obtain acceptance of their proposed MoC from their CAA.  
1.4 This specification is based heavily on the ASTM Committee F44 General Aviation means of compliance guidelines. Unmanned Aircraft System specific guidance is provided below for areas where considerations specific to the unmanned application of aircraft differs from traditional manned aircraft specification or certification requirements. ASTM F3264–18b, Standard Specification for Normal Category Aeroplanes Certification, from the Committee F44 General Aviation group was used as the starting point with referenced ASTM F44 MoC Specification referenced throughout. The referenced F44 standard is to be used as is except in the areas where UAS-specific changes to standard MoC practices have been identified. These changes are identified in the following manner:  
1.4.1 Unique Addition for UAS—New UAS-specific MoC added in addition to standard MoC in areas where new UAS functionality is introduced.  
1.4.2 Substitutions for UAS—Modification of standard MoC to create similar UAS-specific MoCs.  
1.4.3 Not Applicable for UAS—MoCs not needed for Unmanned Aircraft or Remote Pilot Station.  
1.5 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.  
1.6 This international sta...

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...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The test method is intended to be used by sUAS manufacturers, sUAS operators, and CAAs to assess the safety of sUA impacts to people on the ground during operations involving flight over people.  
5.2 The test method provides a framework for creating new designs and evaluating existing designs to determine the sUA’s blunt force trauma injury potential to the head or neck, or both, during a collision with a person on the ground.  
5.3 Applicants can determine whether to use Methods A, B, C, or D based upon their specific sUA characteristics, flight operations, and CAA requirements. In some cases, sUA with low impact KE below 54 ft-lbf [73 J] may not require rigorous testing to ensure safety to the nonparticipating public and can use Method A. Vehicles with higher impact KEs should conduct impact testing using Method B, Method C, or Method D. Method B is simpler than Method C and, therefore, less costly for the applicant. Method B results may be more conservative since the test setup is more rigid and can result in an increase in the amount of energy transferred during the impact than the injury metrics established using a full ATD. Method C testing is costlier and schedule-intensive, but provides a higher level of certainty of the injury potential of the sUA and is more directly comparable to established automotive injury metrics and injury metrics derived from ATD testing and used by the governing CAA. Method D allows for the direct comparison to energy-based requirement of some CAAs.  
5.4 The output of Method A is a verification that the sUA or sUA with mitigation does not exceed the 54 ft-lbf impact KE throughout its flight envelope based upon flight test data as means of obtaining approval for flight over people for Category 2 or 3 operations for the FAA. Other governing CAAs may only require a weight metric or other impact energy metric in lieu of the 54 ft-lbf impact KE.  
5.5 The output from Methods B and C is a characterization of the forces (measure...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is applicable to small unmanned aircraft (sUA) that are limited in the United States in accordance with 14 CFR § 107.3 to be less than 55 lbf. The test method provides a standardized method for assessing the safety of sUA impacts with a person on the ground. Results from testing using Methods A, B, C, or D are intended to be used to support an applicant in obtaining permission from the governing Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) for flight over people. Approval of reports for the conduct of tests and the decision to grant permission rests with the governing CAA based upon adherence to the methodologies outlined in this test method.  
1.2 This test method is based on methods researched by the FAA Center of Excellence for Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) supported by the Alliance for System Safety of UAS through Research Excellence (ASSURE). These methods expand on extensive research and testing conducted by the automotive industry to support quantitative automotive passenger safety standards and testing and test data on sUA collected by ASSURE.  
1.3 The purpose of this test method is to define a method to establish confidence in the overall injury potential of a particular sUA configuration under probable failure conditions. This testing is not meant to simulate the worst possible impact for the most conservative set of the population. It is expected that CAAs should determine what injury thresholds are acceptable under their public policy and determine operational limitations for various operations by using the data from this testing in conjunction with the specific concept of operations proposed by the applicant.  
1.4 The test method provides four methods for evaluating the potential for impact injury: a simple analytical method, a simplified test, a more rigorous test, and a test method normed to approximate energy transfer values with appropriate safety margins applied to each approach to address...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 This practice provides an architectural framework for developing an RTA system, which provides run-time assurance as an alternative to design-time assurance to fulfill safety requirements for an unassured or complex function. The standard provides best practices and guidelines to assist in the RTA system’s development. Further, it describes the architectural components and requirements for designing the RTA system. Compliance to this practice is achieved by deriving RTA System requirements from the standard and capturing them in the Larger System Specification. The system design requirements can then be validated and verified using acceptable engineering practices. It is anticipated that this practice will provide a means to accept complex automation/autonomy aircraft functions that have been difficult to certify using traditional methods.  
4.2 The following three-step process is used to derive verifiable design requirements using this architecture standard:  
4.2.1 Create RTA System requirements using the guidance provided by this architecture standard.  
4.2.2 Capture RTA System requirements in the Larger System Specification.  
4.2.3 Perform verification and validation on the RTA System requirements in the Larger System Specification.  
4.3 The RTA architecture can be applied to all sizes, levels, and classes of UAS. Using run-time assurance can provide systems with the following benefits:  
4.3.1 The ability to mitigate hazards related to nondeterministic or unexpected behavior from unassured functions that employ advanced software methods or algorithmic complexity that cannot be certified using traditional certification practices.  
4.3.2 The ability to use functions for which it may not be possible to obtain artifacts of conventional DO-178 or DO-254 assurance processes.  
4.3.3 The ability to use COTS hardware or software, or both, for the unassured function.
4.3.3.1 For example, automotive components, thereby leveraging mature software with ex...
SCOPE
1.1 The scope of this practice includes the following:  
1.1.1 A set of components that comprise an RTA system.  
1.1.2 Requirements and best practices to determine safe boundaries and RTA system coverage.  
1.1.3 Requirements and best practices for an RTA system and RTA components, as applicable.  
1.1.4 Appendixes with examples that demonstrate key RTA system concepts.  
1.2 RTA components are required to meet the design assurance level dictated by a safety assessment process. Guidance for the safety assessment process may be found in references appropriate for the intended operations (ARP4754A, ARP4761, Practice F3178, etc.).  
1.3 This practice was developed with UAS in mind. It may be applicable for aspects of manned aircraft certification/approval, as well as aviation ground systems. The scope of this practice is also envisioned to allow a variety of aircraft implementations where a human may perform the role of either the Complex Function or a Recovery Function.  
1.4 The scope of this practice does not cover aspects of hardware/software integration. These should be considered separately during the development process.
Note 1: This practice does not suggest a one-size-fits-all strategy knowing that not all use cases may fit well into this architecture. There may exist additional components required to satisfy specific applications to the practice.  
1.5 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.  
1.6 Table of Contents:    
Title  
Section  
Introduction  
Background  
Scope  
1  
Referenced Documents  
2  
ASTM Standards  
2.1  
FAA Advisory Circular  
2.2  
RTCA Standards  
2.3  
SAE Standards  
2.4  
Terminology  
3  
Unique and Common Terminology  
3.3  
Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard  
3.4  
Abbreviations  
3.5  
...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 Demonstration plans developed in accordance with this practice will include all necessary content and key considerations to support an effective flight demonstration program aimed at approval or certification of UAS by the FAA through D&R demonstration.  
4.2 This practice does not address planning requirements for UAS development testing. It is assumed that a manufacturer has completed all UAS design and development and is preparing demonstration programs to support compliance demonstration on a stable and controlled system configuration. Manufacturers who wish to prepare a detailed design and development program should review Specification F3298 for programmatic examples.  
4.3 This practice is intended to be used on low-risk UAS that meet the following design criteria and operating limitations.  
4.3.1 The UAS has a command and control link that enables the pilot-in-command to take contingency action.  
4.3.2 The unmanned aircraft (UA) has a kinetic energy of ≤25 000 ft-lb calculated in accordance with methods specified within the MOC.  
4.3.3 The UA is operated ≤400 ft above ground level (AGL).  
4.3.4 No operations over open-air assemblies (operations over people are acceptable).  
4.3.5 No flight into known icing.  
4.3.6 Maximum of 20:1 aircraft to pilot ratio.  
4.3.7 The UA is electrically powered (excludes internal combustion engines and fuel cells).
SCOPE
1.1 This standard practice is intended for low-risk UAS seeking type certification by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) under 14 CFR Part 21.17(b) in accordance with the FAA durability and reliability (D&R) means of compliance (MOC). The definition of “low-risk UAS” does not necessarily align with other definitions found within corresponding ASTM standards (F3442/F3442M) or other UAS-related standards. For the purposes of this practice, “low-risk” is defined as a UAS operated in accordance with the concept of operations (CONOPs), eligibility criteria, and kinetic energy threshold specified in the G-1 Issue Paper (which will be provided to the applicant by the FAA). See 4.3 for design criteria and operating limitations for low-risk UAS.  
1.2 This standard practice establishes a common methodology and key considerations for the development of minimum flight plans for low-risk UAS that demonstrate aircraft reliability as part of a D&R MOC.  
1.3 The scope of this standard practice encompasses D&R planning, data collection, and reporting.  
1.4 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. This is not intended to limit the systems of units used for design, development testing, or demonstration testing. However, the units of measurement used on pilot-facing placards and markings and manuals must be the same as those used on the corresponding equipment with recognition that international aviation utilizes feet for altitude and knots for airspeed as operational parameters.  
1.5 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.  
1.6 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 Every person who is identified as a PS-RP shall have met the requirements of this guide.  
4.2 This guide is to be used by individuals and agencies having jurisdiction who wish to identify the minimum training standards for PS-RP.  
4.3 This guide is only the first level of training for PS-RP personnel, and as such, only establishes the minimum knowledge, skills, and abilities required for a person to perform as a PS-RP.  
4.4 Nothing in this guide precludes a user of this guide from adding additional requirements for its own members. The US-specific examples are intended to establish a common frame of reference.  
4.5 This guide by itself is not a training document. It is only an outline of the topics required for training or evaluating a PS-RP, but it can be used to develop a training document or program.  
4.6 It is up to the training authority to determine the depth or detail of training to meet its needs. Terminologies and requirements for secondary or associated training should be task/specialization-specific—not all operators require all types and levels of training. This guide supports alternatives and subsets of knowledge requirements appropriate to the type of operation, when part of a documented training program according to Specification F3330.  
4.7 This guide does not stand alone and must be used with the referenced documents to provide the specific information needed by the user.  
4.8 This guide can be used to evaluate a book or other document to determine if its content meets the necessary topics for training a PS-RP. Likewise, the guide can be used to evaluate an existing training program to see if it meets the requirements of this guide.  
4.9 The knowledge, skill, and ability requirements presented in the following sections are not presented in any particular order and do not represent a training sequence.
SCOPE
1.1 This guide covers the minimum training requirements for public safety remote pilots (PS-RPs) as it relates to their general, field, and search specific knowledge and skills.  
1.2 This guide does not provide the minimum training requirements for sUAS operations in partially or fully collapsed structures, in or on water, in confined spaces, or underground (such as caves, mines, and tunnels.)  
1.2.1 Basic remote piloting skills and knowledge are found in Guide F3266.  
1.3 Personnel trained to this guide are not qualified to operate in leadership positions outside of UAS teams.  
1.4 Further training may be required before a PS-RP can participate on a particular kind of UAS team, depending on local needs, regulations, or policies of the authority holding jurisdiction (AHJ).  
1.5 This guide is created without regard to the type of unmanned aircraft system or personal protective equipment that is used by a PS-RP individual. It is expected that all UAS are compliant with Specification F3298 or Specification F2910.  
1.6 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.  
1.7 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 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.

SCOPE
1.1 This specification provides the minimum requirements for a General Maintenance Manual (GMM) for an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) designed, manufactured, and operated in the small UAS category as defined by a Civil Aviation Authority (CAA).  
1.2 This specification applies to support professional entities that will receive operator certification by a CAA, and provide standards of practice for self- or third-party audit of operators of UAS.  
1.3 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
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.

ABSTRACT
This specification establishes the airworthiness requirements for the design of fixed-wing unmanned aircraft systems. It defines the baseline design, construction, and verification requirements for an unmanned aircraft system (UAS), defined as a system composed of the unmanned aircraft and all required on-board subsystems, payload, control station, other required off-board subsystems, any required launch and recovery equipment, all required crew members, and command and control (C2) links between UA and the control station. This specification applies to fixed wing UAS with permission to operate over a defined area and in airspace authorized by a nation's civil aviation authority (CAA) with a fully interactive ground-based person as ”Remote Pilot in Command.”
This specification covers requirements for flight (e.g., proof of compliance, load distribution limits, propeller speed and pitch limits); performance (stalling speed, takeoff, climb, landing, multi-engine); design (equipment, systems, and installation, workmanship, airframe, airspeed limitations, loads and dynamics); construction (fabrication methods, fasteners); structure (loads, flight loads, limit load factors, design airspeeds); command and control system (flight and navigations instruments, automatic flight control system, datalinks, teleoperated flight controls); other required off-board subsystems (required launch and recovery equipment, tethering systems); miscellaneous equipment (payloads, digital flight data recording system); operating limitations and information (weight and center of gravity, propulsion system limitations, electromagnetic environmental effects); documentation (design control, aircraft flight manual, maintenance manual); verification (system verification, methods of verification); and best practices (performance verification, airframe, propulsion system, propeller, miscellaneous equipment such as payloads and high-intensity radiated fields [HIRF] protection).
SCOPE
1.1 This specification covers the airworthiness requirements for the design of light unmanned aircraft systems. This specification defines the baseline design, construction, and verification requirements for an unmanned aircraft system (UAS).  
1.2 As a minimum, a UAS is defined as a system composed of the unmanned aircraft and all required on-board subsystems, payload, control station, other required off-board subsystems, any required launch and recovery equipment, all required crew members, and command and control (C2) links between UA and the control station.  
1.3 The intent is for this standard of practice for CAA, self- or third-party determinations of airworthiness for UAS. This specification provides the core requirements for airworthiness certification of lightweight (UAS) (not necessarily limited to UAs under 55 lb GTOW) or for certain CAA operational approvals using risk-based categories. 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 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. However, at the discretion of the CAA, this specification may be applied to other UAS operations.  
1.5 The values in Imperial units are to be regarded as the standard. The values in SI are for information only.  
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 establi...

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
4.1 Aircraft flying in national airspace are required by the ICAO Chicago Convention and national regulatory rules to have visible markings to determine nationality and registration. UAS shall comply with these rules, although small UAS will have unique rules or exemptions from existing rules due to their small size. This standard is designed to allow UAS to comply with these marking requirements in Annex 7 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation as amended by state regulatory rules.  
4.2 Many ICAO states are assigning UAS to different classes and categories to define the rules UAS must operate under. The ICAO Annex 7 Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPS) apply to UAS Aircraft with the exception of small UAS. The classification of what constitutes a small UAS (sUAS) has been left to ICAO states and the rules under which sUAS operate are dictated by each state.  
4.3 This practice follows ICAO Annex 7 SARPS except in areas where the unique aspects of UAS may not allow compliance. In these cases, this document will address the issue and recommend the need for an alternate compliance method.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice prescribes guidelines for the display of marks to indicate appropriate UAS registration and ownership for all Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) except those categorized as small UAS (sUAS) by regulatory authorities. The FAA is developing a Special Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) to define the term small UAS and provide regulations for these aircraft.  
1.2 This practice will allow determination of nationality in cases where UAS may cross international boundaries.  
1.3 This practice does not apply to sUAS. The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has left the designation of sUAS to each state and the states will develop rules and regulations for sUAS.  
1.4 This practice does not apply to model aircraft.  
1.5 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.  
1.6 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 standard practice intends to ensure the dependability of UAS software. Dependability includes both the safety and security aspects of the software.  
1.2 This practice will focus on the following areas: (a) Organizational controls (for example, management, training) in place during software development. (b) Use of the software in the system, including its architecture and contribution to overall system safety and security. (c) Metrics and design analysis related to assessing the code. (d) Techniques and tools related to code review. (e) Quality assurance. (f) Testing of the software.  
1.3 There is interest from industry and some parts of the CAAs to pursue an alternate means of compliance for software assurance for small UAS (sUAS).  
1.4 This practice is intended to support sUAS operations. It is assumed that the risk of sUAS will vary based on concept of operations, environment, and other variables. The fact that there are no souls onboard the UAS may reduce or eliminate some hazards and risks. However, at the discretion of the CAA, this practice may be applied to other UAS operations.  
1.5 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 terminology standard covers definitions of terms and concepts related to unmanned aircraft systems (UAS). It is intended to encourage the consistent use of terminology throughout all ASTM unmanned aircraft system standards and is intended to complement F3060 Standard Terminology for Aircraft. Terms already included in Terminology F3060 are not duplicated here.  
1.2 A definition adapted from a particular standard within the ASTM F38 collection of standards is not limited to use within only those standards.  
1.3 Additional terms specific to a given standard may be defined solely within that standard and not included here.  
1.4 Units—The definitions of units will be as defined in NIST SP 330, and will not be duplicated in this document. NIST SP 330 is available on the internet.2 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. 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.  
1.5 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.  
1.6 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...

SCOPE
1.1 This terminology standard covers definitions of terms and concepts related to unmanned aircraft systems (UAS). It is intended to encourage the consistent use of terminology throughout all ASTM unmanned aircraft system standards and is intended to complement F3060 Standard Terminology for Aircraft. Terms already included in Terminology F3060 are not duplicated here.  
1.2 A definition adapted from a particular standard within the ASTM F38 collection of standards is not limited to use within only those standards.  
1.3 Additional terms specific to a given standard may be defined solely within that standard and not included here.  
1.4 Units—The definitions of units will be as defined in NIST SP 330, and will not be duplicated in this document. NIST SP 330 is available on the internet.2 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. 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.  
1.5 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.  
1.6 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 applies to unmanned aircraft (UA) with a maximum dimension (for example, wingspan, disc diameter) ≤25 ft, operating at airspeeds below 100 kts, and of any configuration or category. It is meant to be applied in a “lower risk” (low- and medium-risk airspace as described by Joint Authorities for Rulemaking on Unmanned Systems (JARUS)) airspace environment with assumed infrequent encounters with manned aircraft; this is typically in classes G and E airspace (below about 1200 ft above ground level (AGL)), Class B, C, D (below about 400 to 500 ft AGL), below obstacle clearance surface (FAA Order 8260.3, as amended), or within low altitude authorization and notification capability (LAANC) designated areas below the altitude specified in the facility map.  
1.1.1 Traffic encountered is expected to be mixed cooperative and non-cooperative traffic, instrument flight rules (IFR) and visual flight rules (VFR), and to mostly include low-altitude aircraft—including rotorcraft, small general aviation, crop dusters, ultralights, and light sport aircraft, but not transport category aircraft.  
1.1.2 This includes, but is not limited to, airspace where all aircraft are required2 to be cooperative (for example, within the Mode C veil in the U.S.).  
1.2 Ultimate determination of applicability will be governed by the appropriate civil aviation authority (CAA).  
1.3 This specification assumes no air traffic control (ATC) separation services are provided to the UA.  
1.4 While some architectures may have limitations due to external conditions, this specification applies to daytime and nighttime, as well as visual meteorological conditions (VMC) and instrument meteorological conditions (IMC).  
1.5 This specification is applicable to the avoidance of manned aircraft by unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), not UA-to-UA or terrain/obstacle/airspace avoidance (both to be addressed in future efforts). Likewise, birds or natural hazard (for example, weather, clouds) avoidance requirements are not addressed.  
1.6 This specification does not define a specific detect and avoid (DAA) architecture3 and is architecture agnostic. It will, however, define specific safety performance thresholds for a DAA system to meet to ensure safe operation.  
1.7 This specification addresses the definitions and methods for demonstrating compliance to this specification, and the many considerations (for example, detection range, required timeline to meet well-clear, and near mid-air collision (NMAC) safety targets) affecting DAA system integration.  
1.8 The specification highlights how different aspects of the system are designed and interrelated, and how they affect the greater UAS system to enable a developer to make informed decisions within the context of their specific UAS application(s).  
1.9 It is expected this specification will be used by diverse contributors or actors including, but not limited to:  
1.9.1 DAA system designers and integrators,  
1.9.2 Sensor suppliers,  
1.9.3 UA developers,  
1.9.4 Ground control station (GCS) designers,  
1.9.5 UAS service suppliers, and  
1.9.6 Flight control designers.  
1.10 Except for DAA system integrators for whom all the “shalls” in this specification apply, not all aspects of this specification are universally relevant. Nonetheless, familiarity with the entire specification will inform all actors/contributors of how their contributions affect the overall DAA capability and is strongly recommended.  
1.11 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. 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.  
1.12 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility o...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The test method is intended to be used by sUAS manufacturers, sUAS operators, and CAAs to assess the safety of sUA impacts to people on the ground during operations involving flight over people.  
5.2 The test method provides a framework for creating new designs and evaluating existing designs to determine the sUA’s blunt force trauma injury potential to the head or neck, or both, during a collision with a person on the ground.  
5.3 Applicants can determine whether to use Methods A, B, or C based upon their specific sUA characteristics and flight operations. In many cases, sUA with impact KE below 54 ft-lbf [73 J] (see Appendix X1) do not require rigorous testing to ensure safety to the nonparticipating public and can use Method A. Vehicles with higher impact KEs should conduct impact testing using Method B or Method C. Method B is simpler than Method C and, therefore, less costly for the applicant. Method B results may be more conservative since the test setup is more rigid and can result in an increase in the amount of energy transferred during the impact than the injury metrics established using a full ATD. Method C testing is costlier and schedule-intensive, but provides a higher level of certainty of the injury potential of the sUA and is more directly comparable to established automotive injury metrics and injury metrics derived from ATD testing and used by the governing CAA.  
5.4 The output of Method A is a verification that the sUA or sUA with mitigation does not exceed the 54 ft-lbf impact KE throughout its flight envelope based upon flight test data as means of obtaining approval for flight over people for Category 2 or 3 operations for the FAA. Other governing CAAs may only require a weight metric or other impact energy metric in lieu of the 54 ft-lbf impact KE.  
5.5 The output from Methods B and C is a characterization of the forces (measured in acceleration of the head form or ATD) expected during an MPWC head impact as a function of sUA KE. ...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is applicable to small unmanned aircraft (sUA) that are limited in the United States in accordance with 14 CFR § 107.3 to be less than 55 lbf. The test method provides a standardized method for assessing the safety of sUA impacts with a person on the ground. Results from testing using Methods A, B, or C are intended to be used to support an applicant in obtaining permission from the governing Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) for flight over people. Approval of reports for the conduct of tests and the decision to grant permission rests with the governing CAA based upon adherence to the methodologies outlined in this test method.  
1.2 This test method is based on methods researched by the FAA Center of Excellence for Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) supported by the Alliance for System Safety of UAS through Research Excellence (ASSURE). These methods expand on extensive research and testing conducted by the automotive industry to support quantitative automotive passenger safety standards and testing and test data on sUA collected by ASSURE.  
1.3 The purpose of this test method is to define a method to establish confidence in the overall injury potential of a particular sUA configuration under probable failure conditions. This testing is not meant to simulate the worst possible impact for the most conservative set of the population. It is expected that CAAs should determine what injury thresholds are acceptable under their public policy and determine operational limitations for various operations by using the data from this testing in conjunction with the specific concept of operations proposed by the applicant.  
1.4 The test method provides three methods for evaluating the potential for impact injury: a simple analytical method, a simplified test, and a more rigorous test with appropriate safety margins applied to each approach to address uncertainty in each of the approaches.  
1.5 The applicant s...

SCOPE
1.1 This terminology standard covers definitions of terms and concepts related to unmanned aircraft systems (UAS). It is intended to encourage the consistent use of terminology throughout all ASTM unmanned aircraft system standards and is intended to complement F3060 Standard Terminology for Aircraft. Terms already included in Terminology F3060 are not duplicated here.  
1.2 A definition adapted from a particular standard within the ASTM F38 collection of standards is not limited to use within only those standards.  
1.3 Additional terms specific to a given standard may be defined solely within that standard and not included here.  
1.4 Units—The definitions of units will be as defined in NIST SP 330, and will not be duplicated in this document. NIST SP 330 is available on the internet.2 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. 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.  
1.5 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.  
1.6 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 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 establishes the minimum set of requirements for an independent audit program for unmanned aircraft system operators. The intended use is to provide minimum requirements for an initial assessment of operators bringing a new aircraft model or service to market, or for periodic review of an existing operator’s operations.  
4.2 Compliance to this practice would ensure that the audit program and those who execute it meet the consensus set of minimum requirements and qualifications.  
4.3 This practice does not mandate operator independent audits.  
4.4 Independent audits are to be conducted only at the request of the operator or the relevant CAA. This does not preclude an independent audit at the request of a court of law or arbitrator.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice establishes a minimum set of requirements for an Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Operator Independent Audit Program in compliance with Practice F3365.  
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, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.3 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 The purpose of this standard practice is to provide the minimum requirements for the conduct of compliance audits.  
3.2 The intended use of this practice is to provide a basis for an internal or external entity to develop an audit program. An audit program defines specific requirements for the execution of audits for a particular objective. An example of an audit program would be an external (third party) audit of UAS manufacturer’s quality assurance system.  
3.3 Compliance to this practice would ensure that audit programs and those who develop and execute them are following a consensus set of minimum requirements.  
3.4 This practice does not mandate either internal or external audits.  
3.5 An auditing entity cannot request or approve an audit.  
3.6 Other Audit Criteria—Other audit criteria may be included in the audit scope if specified in the audit plan. Examples include safety, technical, operational, and management requirements. Items that are outside the scope of auditable criteria may be submitted as observations for possible resolution. However, these are not binding and are not mandatory.  
3.7 Additional Services—Additional services are outside the scope of an audit objective. Examples of such services are consultation to resolve negative or open findings or any other service where the auditing entity conducts an activity other than an audit for the audited entity.  
3.8 Compliance Assurance—An audit is only an indicator of the compliance health of the facility or organization, or both, during only the period under review and therefore has limited compliance assurance and is not assumed to be exhaustive.  
3.9 Level of Review is Variable—The audit scope may vary to meet different audit objectives. For example, the audit scope may include only selected audit criteria, selected period under review, or selected portions of a facility or organization.
SCOPE
1.1 This standard practice establishes the minimum set of requirements for auditing programs, methods, and systems, the responsibilities for all parties involved, and qualifications for entities conducting audits against ASTM standards on Unmanned Aircraft Systems.  
1.2 This practice provides requirements to enable consistent and structured examination of objective evidence for compliance that is beneficial for the UAS industry and its consumers. It is the intent of this practice to provide the necessary minimum requirements for organizations to develop audit programs and procedures.  
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.

SCOPE
1.1 This specification covers the design and manufacture requirements for deployable parachutes of small unmanned aircraft (sUA). This specification defines the design, fabrication, and test requirements of installable, deployable parachute recovery systems (PRS) that are designed to be integrated into a sUA to lessen the impact energy of the system should the sUA fail to sustain normal stable safe flight. Compliance with this specification is intended to support an applicant in obtaining permission from a civil aviation authority (CAA) to fly a sUA over people.  
1.2 This specification is applicable to the design, construction, and test of deployable parachute recovery systems that may be incorporated into the system or structure, or both, of sUA seeking civil aviation authority (CAA) approval in the form of technical standard orders (TSO), flight certificates, flight waivers, flight permits, or other like documentation.  
1.3 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.  
1.4 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 defines the requirements for training and the development of training manuals for the unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) operator.  
1.2 The specification addresses the requirements or best practices, or both, for documentation and organization of a professional operator (that is, for compensation and hire) for the purposes of internal training programs and for programs offered to the general public.  
1.3 This specification supports professional entities that will receive operator certification by a CAA, and provide standards of practice for self- or third-party audit of operators of UAS.  
1.4 The standard case study used to develop this specification focused on operators of light UAS (below 1320 lb/600 kg as defined by EASA), but the specification may be applied to larger aircraft for using other methods of classification (that is, risk based classes and pilot privileges classes).  
1.5 Training manuals that do not include all the minimum requirements of this specification may not be referred to as meeting this specification.  
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.

SCOPE
1.1 This specification provides the minimum requirements for an Unmanned Aircraft Flight Manual (UFM) for an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) designed, manufactured, and operated in the light UAS category as defined by a Civil Aviation Authority (CAA). Depending on the size and complexity of the UAS, an UFM may also contain the instruction for maintenance and continuing airworthiness for owner / operator authorized maintenance.  
1.2 This specification defines the UFM information that shall be provided by the manufacturer of a UAS as part of the initial sale or transfer to an end user.  
1.3 This specification applies to a UAS seeking a CAA approval, in the form of airworthiness certificates, type certificates, flight permits, or other like documentation as a UAS, in the configuration specified in the UFM delivered with the system.  
1.4 Any modifications that invalidate or otherwise affect the accuracy of UFM operating instructions shall be approved by the manufacturer and communicated to the regulatory authority in the certificate / permit application.  
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 airworthiness requirements for the design of fixed-wing unmanned aircraft systems. This specification defines the baseline design, construction, and verification requirements for an unmanned aircraft system (UAS).  
1.2 As a minimum, a UAS is defined as a system composed of the unmanned aircraft and all required on-board subsystems, payload, control station, other required off-board subsystems, any required launch and recovery equipment, all required crew members, and command and control (C2) links between UA and the control station.  
1.3 The intent is for this standard of practice for CAA, self- or third-party determinations of airworthiness for UAS. This specification provides the core requirements for airworthiness certification of lightweight (UAS) (not necessarily limited to UAs under 55 lb GTOW) or for certain CAA operational approvals using risk-based categories. 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 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. However, at the discretion of the CAA, this specification may be applied to other UAS operations.  
1.5 The values in Imperial units are to be regarded as the standard. The values in SI are for information only.  
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
4.1 The purpose of this guide is to provide a standardized means of facilitating Remote Pilot training. The guide should be used by all individuals and agencies that train such persons.  
4.2 Successful completion of this training course neither constitutes nor implies certification or licensure from the CAA.  
4.3 This guide is intended to provide guidance to:  
4.3.1 Individuals, who are currently manned pilots (that is, FAA Part 61 or EASA FCL certificate holders), interested in pursuing academic programs and professional opportunities as a remote pilot,  
4.3.2 Individuals, who are currently remote pilots (that is, FAA under Part 107, CASA RePL under Part 101) who want to voluntarily comply with a higher standard, and  
4.3.3 Public agencies that self-certify remote pilots interested in developing unmanned aircraft systems programs.  
4.4 This guide describes required education, training, and continuing professional development for those performing as professional remote pilot. Remote Pilot courses that do not include all of the knowledge and skill objectives of this guide may not be referred to as meeting this guide.
SCOPE
1.1 This guide is intended for two distinct readers: educators who wish to develop curricula and training courses and individual pilots wishing to raise their knowledge level for particular flight operations. The guide describes the knowledge, skills, and abilities required to safely operate unmanned aircraft for commercial purposes. A Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) may, at their discretion, use this guide to aid the development of existing or future regulations. This guide addresses powered fixed-wing, vertical-take-off and lift and rotorcraft UAS and not other potential unmanned aircraft categories (for example, glider, lighter-than-air, etc.).  
1.2 An unmanned aircraft system (UAS) is composed of the unmanned aircraft and all required on-board subsystems, payloads, control station, other required off-board subsystems, any required launch and recovery equipment, all required crew members, and command and control (C2) links between UA and the control station.  
1.3 This guide provides fundamental general knowledge, task performance and knowledge, and activities and functions for remote pilots of lightweight UAS (but not necessarily limited to UAs under 55 lb Gross Take Off Weight) or for certain CAA operational approvals using risk-based categories. Flight operations outside the scope of this guide require additional knowledge, experience, and training.  
1.4 This guide can be used to evaluate a training course outline and syllabus to determine when its content includes the topics necessary for training individuals to be proficient and competent remote pilot personnel. Likewise, this guide may be used to evaluate an existing training program to see when it meets the requirements in this guide.  
1.5 A person meeting the requirements of this guide does not necessarily possess adequate knowledge, experience, and training to make specific mission-critical decisions safely. This guide merely describes recommended topics and does not provide specific mission training.  
1.6 It is not the intent of this guide to require that a training course track the sequence or exact scope of the topics presented. However, the knowledge and skill objectives that are part of the training course should be included in any training course outline and syllabus to be used to train remote pilots. Furthermore, it is not the intent of this guide to limit the addition of knowledge and skill objectives required by local conditions or any governmental body.  
1.7 The knowledge, skills, and abilities described in the following sections are not intended to be a rigid training sequence and should be adjusted by the appropriate CAA for specific scope and context.  
1.8 This guide does not stand alone and must be used with other CAA/ASTM standards to identify the knowledge, skills, and abi...

SCOPE
1.1 This standard practice defines design and test best practices that if followed, would provide guidance to an applicant for providing evidence to the civil aviation authority (CAA) that the flight behavior of an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) containing complex function(s) is constrained through a run-time assurance (RTA) architecture to maintain an acceptable level of flight safety.  
1.2 This practice will have the benefit of enabling highly automated UAS operations. It is envisioned that applicants will use this practice as a means of compliance for safe implementation of complex functions for routine operations.  
1.3 Verification of complex functions is considered too challenging to use conventional software assurance methods such as RTCA DO-178C or IEC 61508. Certification challenges under these standards include generating required artifacts, such as requirements, elimination of unintended functionality, traceability/coverage, and test cases required for verification.  
1.4 There is significant interest from industry and CAAs to have a standard practice to enable flight operations for UAS containing complex functions. Developing a certification path for these UAS technologies could also advance safety in General Aviation.  
1.5 The following design tenets are offered to provide guidance to the UAS manufacturer as to the intended application of this standard.  
1.5.1 The RTA Architecture is intended to be used for Complex Functions that would require an amount of effort that is beyond reasonably practicable to pass CAA conventional certification requirements.  
1.5.2 The UAS manufacturer should engage in appropriate design, test, and validation activities to enable the Complex Function to perform as intended.  
1.5.3 The complexity of the Recovery Control Function (RCF) deterministic commands should be minimized insofar as practicable.  
1.5.4 Repeated invocation of an RCF during a single mission may be considered an indication of improper Complex Function performance.  
1.5.5 An RTA design with multiple RCFs should consider the aircraft state, relative outcomes, and differences in RTA recovery times in prioritizing the recovery actions in the safety monitor.  
1.5.6 The UAS manufacturer should strive to minimize false or nuisance triggers of one or more RCFs as these false alarms undermine user confidence in the system and impact operational efficiency.  
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
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 provides the minimum requirements for an Aircraft Flight Manual (AFM) for an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) designed, manufactured, and operated in the small UAS (sUAS) category as defined by a Civil Aviation Authority (CAA). Depending on the size and complexity of the sUAS, an AFM may also contain the instruction for maintenance and continuing airworthiness for owner / operator authorized maintenance.  
1.2 This specification defines the AFM information that shall be provided by the manufacturer of a sUAS as part of the initial sale or transfer to an end user.  
1.3 This specification applies to a sUAS seeking a CAA approval, in the form of airworthiness certificates, type certificates, flight permits, or other like documentation as a sUAS, in the configuration specified in the AFM delivered with the system.  
1.4 Any modifications that invalidate or otherwise affect the accuracy of AFM operating instructions shall be approved by the manufacturer and communicated to the regulatory authority in the certificate / permit application.

ABSTRACT
This standard specifies the requirements for batteries used in small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (sUAS). It covers the standard terminology for sUAS as well as the requirements with respect to cells, mechanical design and assembly, electrical design, and maintenance of the pack and the recording of maintenance data.
SCOPE
1.1 This standard defines the requirements for batteries used in small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (sUAS).  
1.2 This standard does not define requirements for the systems in which sUAS battery packs may be utilized.  
1.3 This standard is subordinate to Specification F2910.  
1.4 If allowed by a nation’s GAA, certain sUAS may be exempt from this standard and may use commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) batteries in non-safety-critical payloads (lithium chemistries may not be exempted). Air transport regulations still shall be adhered to when air transport is used for COTS cells or batteries in bulk.  
1.5 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.

ABSTRACT
This specification provides a consensus standard for an application to a nation's governing aviation authority (GAA) for a permit to operate a small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS) for commercial or public use purposes. It is intended for all sUAS that are allowed to operate over a defined area and in airspace authorized by a nation's GAA. Unless otherwise specified by a nation's GAA, this specification applies only to UA that have a maximum gross takeoff weight of 25 kg (55 lb) or less. This specification covers general command and control (C2) requirements, C2 system spectrum requirements, C2 link requirements, UA requirements, and fly-away functionality.
SCOPE
1.1 This specification is provided as a consensus standard in support of an application to a nation’s governing aviation authority (GAA) for a permit to operate a small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS) for commercial or public use purposes.  
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.