So, uh, this is Warren Silverman again, introducing. I was just trying to figure out how many years I've known probably for over 30 years. We've worked together, we've traveled internationally, although he's been a heck of a lot more places than I have. He was the president of asthma. He was the president of the International Association of aviation and space medicine. He's had many, many, many awards. He's a great fellow, and he is a very enthusiastic speaker as I think you guys remember, hopefully from Charlotte. I think it was Charlotte and I wanted him to give this talk because it was so it was excellent. Yeah, so, um, keep stopping at me and we have some technical. Yeah, not amazing. Isn't that? All right. So, uh, are we going to? So that's it. And actually, and I work together when he was the head of education, and I was the head of certification. A lot of the stuff that airman still experience is because of things that we started here around for the system was even the D. I. W. S. system even came around. Um, I mean, I can't say enough and I'm proud to introduce Dr and hopefully we can get this started. We will. Actually, he retired and then I brought him back a 2nd time. And now he's doing our videos on some of the. Why also the minute you need some. Oh, yes. Amy. So that's great. So, it is a pleasure to be here again. I'm just going to share screen. Okay. And then you'll be cooking. So I'm just like, just like, I get bored easily. So, but let me tell you with the stuff that we are doing. There is not a single day that is the same as the previous day. So, a lot of activity going on, particularly because of what is happening with technologies. What is happening also with the role of humans interacting with those technologies, some of the, the new challenges having to do with artificial intelligence, machine learning, because of our virtual reality of mental reality. So, I want to cover some of those area, but do it around what the issue is the new world of patient systems. I don't have anything to disclose. I work for the federal government. So, not like you guys that you can deduct from your income tax, your expenses. We can't. So, the reality is that the future is now and we shouldn't resist it. We should embrace it. In fact, from a point of view of medicine, tell me how many of you in your own area of expertise, you can't keep up with everything that is relevant to your practice every single day. It's impossible. Yes, so we have reached the point where we need to have more and more technology helping us just with keeping up with the knowledge, new knowledge that is being generated. So, here is just to give you a strategic outlook from our office of aerospace medicine. On all of the different modalities of transportation that we're dealing with right now. So, yes, we have had the traditional transportation methods, but we are dealing in fact, since 1995, we started dealing with commercial space transportation. We developed the guidance for medical screening. They are called space flight participants, not passengers. For space, they are SPFs. That's the federal legal term. So, then we're also dealing with flying cars, as you can see right there. In fact, we are in the process of certifying three different types of flying cars. We have flying motorcycles. We have backpacks with microturbines. In fact, we started having incidents at the OEX. The last one was about three weeks ago. That the pilot on a 747 final approach to land reported, there was this guy with a backpack with microturbines. That was in the back. Okay, and we have about nine or ten different types of backpacks with microturbines, and we're dealing with that. Then one of the areas that I'm going to talk a little bit more about is the single pilot commercial aviation operations. There is pressure to go from having commercial pilots with pilot and co-pilot to get rid of the co-pilot and have just the captain, nobody else. Huge pressure about that, that I will discuss that with you. Then, of course, we have drones. Tons of drones. Tons of drones on the left side. We have drones from the microtrons all the way to the wingspan of a Boeing 737 flying on the civilian sector. And then the one just below that chart, and it's the advanced air mobility vehicles or urban air mobility vehicles. We're talking about large quadcopters carrying two, four, six, eight, and ten passengers, no pilot on board. And we are supposed to start certifying those this year, okay, for urban mobility. So all of these are significant challenges, very interesting. I love it because we don't have all of the answers. So we're trying to come up with how we're going to make sure that all of these operations are safe. And we're not only going to protect the people who are on board, but also people on the ground who have nothing to do with those flights. So, yes, the human being is becoming the weaker link. In fact, in the military aviation, when we implemented F-16, that's when we surpassed the capabilities of the human being. Well, that's happening more and more. So how are we going to keep that human in the loop? That's part of the challenge. So let me start with the single pilot operations. It is nothing new. We have been doing it in general aviation. We have been flying single pilot operations for years. So we have some lessons learned from that type of operation, including single pilot safety. We have learned so much from there that could be applicable to commercial aviation. So it is not reinventing the wheel completely. In fact, the MITRE Corporation, they came up with three recommendations. That the information systems provide cognitive assistance to GA pilots, okay, over those three areas. That we can quantify in-flight workload based on cognitive performance analysis. Number two, we can quantify pilot error probabilities with human reliability analysis. And number three, we can quantify accident sequence frequencies with PRA. So the tools are there. How we use them and how fast we use them, that's a different question. But this is not only general aviation. What started going in the direction of commercial operation with a single pilot was the business aviation. We started with very light jets, and I'm going back now about eight to nine years ago. That's when we started doing commercial operations just with one pilot, augmented by cockpit automation. In fact, the National Business Aviation Association, they have all kinds of recommendations and tools to make it easy. Now, here the issue is the jump to commercial aviation. We are not the first. As of, let me see, two months ago, the U.S. Air Force made the decision that they want to start flying KC-130 air-to-air refueling operations. With a single pilot in the cockpit and a single tail boomer to refuel the aircraft that are trying to get extra fuel. So I'm following that because I want to learn what they are learning as a result of that experience, because that would be applicable to commercial aviation. Now, when we say commercial aviation, it would not be automatically passenger operations. We would start with cargo operations, Federal Express, DHL, all of those. And whatever we learn from there, of course, will transfer to the operation where we carry passengers. So a lot of research going in this direction, not only from us, but also from the manufacturers of aircraft, from Boeing. Now, let me ask you a question. Do you think that we were already capable, based on technology, to have an even passenger aircraft take off, fly, land automatically? Easily 12 years ago. The infrastructure is there. The question becomes, is society ready for that? That's a completely different question. Most people, when they board an aircraft, what do they do? They look to the left, and the cockpit is open. What do people do if they see that there is only one seat? Are we ready for that? That's the question. And it's not just the technology, but the human behavior, the human response to other operations. Are we going to accept that? People tell me, when that happens, I will no longer fly with airline operations. So we'll see what goes in that direction. The European Aviation Safety Agency, they have research going on right now on how to go in the direction of single pilot operations. Initially, I still have the second pilot, but not do anything, just to be available there. And then if they demonstrate that this is the same equivalent level of safety, and by 2025, I guess, is going to happen next year, when they jump to the next phase, which is now from takeoff to landing, that person doesn't do anything at all, not a touch. And if that is demonstrated that even the pilot is not necessary, then that's what would make it possible to say, for sure, it's equivalent level of safety. Now, this is an intermediate step, because the whole idea is to go from one pilot operation to no pilot operation, to actually eliminate also the pilot in command. That's the direction that we're working with this. So let me jump. This is our Research, Engineering, and Development Advisory Committee within the FAA. That includes people from academia, from DOD, other federal agencies, also from the industry, both manufacturers and operators. And they met this year, and they made three different recommendations. That we have to deal with the introduction of pilot state monitoring technologies. What does that mean? Biomedical monitoring in flight. Number two, related decision-making algorithms. How can the airplane identify what's happening to the pilot in real time? Who is the only pilot on board? And the third one, automation technologies in the cockpit. That point in the direction of, can I identify when I should take over control from the pilot? Because the pilot is no longer able to actually fly the aircraft. So from that, let me just show you the chart, and just concentrate on the top left. Let's say you have pilot incapacitation events. It doesn't have to be necessarily a complete incapacitation. Could be so, could be so then. How am I going to identify with technology that the pilot is incapacitated? Don't we have biosensors today that will tell me this person is incapacitated? And we're talking about not just losing consciousness, but cognitive impairment. Can I say that the pilot can no longer operate the aircraft? In fact, one even more difficult, and I came from a meeting this week in Silicon Valley. Do we have a sensor that we could install in an aircraft that tells us if the pilot died? No. A definition of death and demonstration of death varies from state to state, from country to country. And if you waste minutes trying to determine whether or not the pilot is dead, that may be too long. So we do not have today a sensor to tell me, well, the pilot is dead, take over control from the pilot. So very interesting, very challenging questions that I really love that stuff. But we have learned a lot from the fatigue risk mitigation. Yes, now with technology, we can identify if there's a certain level of fatigue in the cockpit with the pilots real time. It is not to the point where you can say, well, now the pilot is too tired, so take over control of the airplane from the pilot. We're not there yet, but we are going in that direction. So, yes, more research is needed. Now, what is the role of artificial intelligence and machine learning in support of single pilot operations? Well, a lot of work is going in this direction. And in fact, some of that, I don't know if you're familiar, but the use of artificial intelligence in medicine has exploded, particularly in medical imaging. Now, there are many, many groups that are using first evaluation is done by artificial intelligence. And depending upon what is the result, it will say, well, this image looks ambitious. That should be checked by a radiologist. But the volume is so high that right now, we don't have enough imaginologists in the United States to actually review every single MRI that is being taken today. Therefore, we have to rely more and more in computer analysis through artificial intelligence algorithms. So, yes, we're going in that direction. Now, here's another one. I had the opportunity to talk to the engineer who was working on development at Ford Motor Company. You know that company that develops medical devices? Well, the car already has plenty of computers. So, they want to develop between Ford and Medtronic, essentially, a biomedical monitoring system where the car is monitoring the driver. In fact, I saw a demonstration where the car will tell the driver, well, you are not alert enough, so you better stop and relax. And if the person doesn't respond, or, for example, a diabetic driver, now, you're constantly monitoring with a CGM, the blood glucose level. The car will tell the driver, your blood glucose is going low. You better eat something. And the person doesn't eat. Well, I'm going to stop the car and activate 911 right now. Now, let me ask you a question. What's more technically difficult, to automate a car or to automate an airplane? The car! There are so many more unexpected events that can happen on the ground as opposed to happening in the air. And by the way, going beyond that, did you know that Blue Origin and SpaceX and Axiom are fully automated flights? The people on board are passengers, spaceflight participants. There is no astronaut. In fact, there are no control systems on board the Dragon capsule. The only space vehicle that has pilot and co-pilot is Virgin Galactic. That's it. All of the other ones are fully automated. And there is no remote operator either. The backup is a computer on the ground. So that's also easier to do because it's in space. So where are we? In the middle, between cars and space vehicles. So that's where we're trying to come up with what's the right solution. But as you can see in this particular system, I undermine there the different conditions that they are trying to identify through biomedical monitoring that can happen to a person in flight. Now, it is not the only one for our company because, in fact, Toyota is working on this. One new area of biomedical monitoring needs to use actually radar technology in order to monitor what's happening from different perspectives. Including now, one of the latest prototypes is when you use radar to do imaging of women to detect breast cancer earlier than any other mode of imaging. It's amazing what is going on in those areas. But not only for that. In fact, I'm going to show you here. There are several applications of that. But not this one. This one has a different reason. Finally, in January of 2021, we tried for six years to convince that we should allow continuous glucose monitoring for pilots so that we have more flexibility for insulin-dependent diabetic pilots. But it took six years. Finally, we have it. And we're having more and more pilots insulin-dependent with CGM, which is perfect. Because you can set the sampling rate for blood glucose, the frequency that you want. And now you have essentially ongoing biomedical monitoring of your blood glucose. That's perfect. What would I do next year? If I can link that to the system in the aircraft, now the aircraft is monitoring the pilot. And let's say that the pilot forgot to bring something to eat and is becoming hypoglycemic. If the system detects that, now they cover control of the airplane. Okay? Just like in a car, the same thing. In fact, we have a chief scientist and technical advisor for biodynamics at the FAA. He's insulin-dependent diabetic. He loves to show off his equipment because it is so flexible also now with different requirements for metabolism. Like if you're exercising or you are doing nothing for previous systems, it was very difficult to monitor what was your actual blood glucose level. With the new system, it's amazing what you can do with us. I mean, not only one. There are several. So we started allowing those levels that you can see there. So far, our experience is going very well. So here is the criteria that we use as far as the special medical conditions or waiver. We require six months stability in insulin. Initial value of reports and testing, obviously, like the usual protocol for insulin-dependent diabetics. Consider a 12-month specialization. And then you see the requirement there for the research education. So far, going very well. Other applications of radar technology is amazing. You see the whole list right here. It's incredible. I have seen already some of these. In fact, there is one that is approved by FDA. You can actually install sensors, let's say, in retirement homes where the person is, where the senior citizen is living, that may have problems with mobility or instability while moving around. It can actually monitor the position, the heart rate, respiratory rate, without touching anything. It's using LiDAR technology. It is incredible what is going on with this. So all of those that you see there are staying in control. Also going on with that kind of technology. So why not install all these sensors in the cockpit to identify if the pilot is even moving? Or that may give you indirect evidence that probably the pilot is asleep or the pilot is unconscious, one of the two. So a lot going on there. But let me show you this one because I met the chief executive officer. This is actually the design of this. By the way, this week this company was purchased by another large corporation so that they are going to commercialize it. This is the first time that you have technology, ambulatory technology, to measure blood pressure, not having to inflate your wrist, not having to inflate your forearm. This is a microchip that uses LiDAR technology, essentially radar. You place it on top of any artery on your body, and it's detecting the motion of the artery. And that gives you the systolic and diastolic pressure. Through the clinical trial going on right now, they are using it in 2,500 senior citizens in clinics. It's amazing what's going on with this. Now, I like it because I'm having fun. Can you imagine putting those sensors inside the helmet of the pilot over the table? Or putting it inside the flight suit to be over the jugular vein? Or, I mean, on the neck, after artery, or behind the knee? I mean, the potential applications there are huge for ongoing blood pressure measurement. It's incredible. I exposed one of these units to the output chamber, put it in a rapid decompression. Nothing happened to it. We crashed it in one of our crash doming because I want to know if it happens. It's still operating. So let me jump from that one. Probably starting with specific areas. On manned aerial systems that we should not use on man because that's gender-specific. So it could be on manned aerial vehicles. We said, no, we shouldn't. Drones is more gender-neutral. But let me tell you, this is part of the problem. Every single one of those terms refers to the same thing. Drones. How can we keep using different terms of standardizing and saying this is for everybody around the world is the same terminology. We cannot agree and that's ridiculous. But anyway, now let me tell you this is the registration as of the end of December of 2023 in the United States. How many drones, I will revert to drones, or on-crew aircraft systems? 856,000. But then you see right there the difference between recreational and commercial on the left one and then the operators between male operators and female operators. Most of the operators today are men. Then let's start talking about the vehicles themselves. You go from the micro UASs, they can say well what's a big deal with one of these? A single one, nothing. But think about swarms of hundreds or thousands of them flying in formation flight and now you're talking about different implications. I will show you an example later. Then a little bit bigger the size of your hand that you have to start thinking how well the potential impact. How many of you are general aviation pilots? You don't want a drone to crash against your small aircraft, no. We're doing studies right now on what's the impact, what is the damage caused by drones of different sizes to the canopy, to the vertical stabilizer, to the leading edge of the wing, being ingested by the engines. It's incredible. A little bit bigger than that, then you go to the point that it becomes commercial. Now there are many applications, many commercial applications, remote sensing. You have even a cropduster, the one on the left, that's a cropduster, a helicopter. But then of course the monitoring of power lines, monitoring of pipelines, all kinds of different applications. So as of today, the applications and types of applications, the limit is the imagination of people. We have been approaching the FAA with people that we say, you want to do what? I'm going to give you some examples of them. This is now also for cargo operations, the ball of drone. Now as far as military types of drones, this is the largest one. This is the wingspan of a Hercules, a C-130. You're talking about a big drone, okay. The Phantom I from the Navy, the wingspan of a Boeing 767. In fact, I know one company that wants to fully automate a Boeing 747, convert it into a drone, remotely controlled, a Boeing 747, to deliver cargo. Then on the civilian sector, you have the, from Israel, the Heron 1, which is about the wingspan of a King Air Rampage 300. And then you have the biggest one, the I-10, the wingspan of an Embraer 175, one of the original jets that you fly with American Eagle. That's one of those. Now as far as capacity and fuselage, this is the biggest one, is the Raven X, 80-foot fuselage. Now I mentioned to you all the applications. This is just a partial list of what people want to do with drones. It is incredible. Now the ones that were supporting our operations, like this one, for medical purposes. In fact, there is a study going on right now with Mayo Clinic that you can transport blood, tissues, organs to make it faster in case that you need it at another facility. Another application of this expanding rapidly is the delivery of a semi-automatic defibrillators, that that would be faster than trying to use a drone ambulance to carry that equipment, especially if you don't have it in the area. Golf courses is a perfect example because probably the closest place would be where you have the glove. But that may be far away from where you are playing golf. So if they have a drone right there, they could easily deliver the defibrillator to where the person was collapsing. But it could be landing or it could be deployed with a small parachute, pharmacy, I mean medications. I just sent two of my people last month. This is a big, it's expanding this operation in the United States. It's called the Zip Line, that they are delivering medical supplies to people in suburban areas. They started doing that in Africa and other countries like you see on the left side. They never had a crash. So it has become so successful that now these three states in the U.S., they are delivering medications to suburban areas using drones. And it's going extremely well. So I sent some of my people who are experts in aerospace human factors to determine what was the risk of potential deviations from the flight and potential crashes. The automation they're using is incredible. They have thought about almost every potential issue other than having probably one bird attracting one of the drones. That is a little bit different. CBS, they started also exploring the delivery of medication, the same thing with Walmart. And even in the civilian sector, exploring the use of one of these vehicles to transport patients. And I'm not talking about the typical air ambulance that you still have down there and helicopter. No, just load the patient there, the vehicle will go. And so it's not only military, it's also in civilian sector. On the military side, this is one of the examples from Israel. I had the chance to actually see this vehicle, where if you're in a combat area, well, instead of putting another pilot at risk to go and rescue somebody, send one of these things. You just put the casualty in the vehicle and take the person to an area to be taken care of. Now, on the applications that I'm not as supportive, you can buy that harness today on the internet. Now, my question is, how does the owner of the dog know that the dog wanted to fly like that? And why? That's the other one. Why would you let it stop? So, as I said, the limit is your imagination, what you can do. Now, swarms. This is the record still standing today. And it was done in China. They flew 3,051 drones in formation at the size of a laptop. And that's the entire swarm actually controlled by two of the people that you see standing right there. At this point, they are being used for advertisement purposes. Do you remember the Winter Olympics that they had a show? If you go to Bangkok, every night they're having a show along the river. But now, that's just advertisement. In fact, even Walt Disney Studios, they use those for show. What about if you increase the vertical separation and the horizontal separation? You have an amazing platform for remote sensing and retransmission of communication signals. So you bet that's going to happen. But now you're occupying a bigger chunk of the airspace where you have piloted aircraft flying. So we have to pay attention to that. So from the human perspective in UAS operations, we have two choices. You have a pilot or a remote operator, or you don't. So from that point of view, you have to consider different levels of automation. And I'm not going to spend too much detail on this one, but you can go from no automation over on the left side to full automation here. So once you go in that progression, you have to make sure that the systems are supporting that level of automation. And let me ask you a simple question. If you are fully automated, what is the level of redundancy that you will require for that system to make sure that it doesn't fail? And just to establish a comparison, when we're flying space shuttle, for many of the critical subsystems, they have triple and quadruple redundancy. That's why it was so expensive. We cannot do that here. We can't. So how much, let's say, reliability of the systems is required that then we can agree to certify that? The standard for most space designs is what we call TMR, triple modular redundancy with replacement. Yep. And that becomes the fourth level of redundancy. Yeah. So essentially three to four level. We don't have that today in commercial space vehicles because we are not certifying commercial space vehicles. We are licensing the flight. What's the difference right there? When we started flying in aviation, Congress told us, well, if you establish standards today, it's like telling the Wright brothers that they had to meet certification standards from the FAA. They would have never launched. So I said, you do the same thing to the commercial space industry, you will make it fail. So we only license the operation. What that means is we do not care what components are used for the vehicle. We do not care what fuel they use, as long as the probability of catastrophic failure that could injure or kill somebody on the ground or damage property on the ground is acceptable. If it's not acceptable, we don't allow them to fly. That is what is going to change this year in October. Finally, we'll have the authority to implement regulatory standards for commercial space transportation. Now for on the medical side, we didn't have to wait because right now the requirement is a class two FAA medical certificate for the operator of a commercial space vehicle. However, as I mentioned to you, three of the vehicles, they don't even have a pilot. So that only applies right now to Virgin Galactic, that they have a pilot and co-pilot. And on their own, they decided we don't care that the FAA said a class two. As far as we're concerned, we're highly good pilots. They have to meet at least the criteria for a class one medical certificate, not a class two. So things like those happen. Three are here. Now we require, and have we required since the beginning of medical certification standards to have the co-pilot have a class one medical certificate? No, no, no. The requirement has only been for the captain. It has been up to the industry to say, look, at any point in time, is incapacitated, who becomes the de facto pilot? The co-pilot. So they say, well, the co-pilot has to meet exactly the same certification requirement. But that came from the industry. It didn't come from us. And the same thing is happening in commercial space. So what about the medical requirements for UAS pilot in command? In this case, covers the pilot in command, the visual observer, or direct participant. So any of those functions essentially is kind of a very generic approach that the person should not do it if there is a possibility that there may be a physical or mental condition that would interfere with the safe operation. Essentially, we're relying on them making the decision because there is no medical certification test right now. In the military, yes, but it changes. It varies depending upon if it is the Air Force, the Army, or the Navy. They have different requirements and different licensing needs for that. Then also, if it is visual line of sight, these are the requirements. And this is the definition of a line of sight. But the challenging part is, what is the definition of line of sight? And is that a no for anybody? I have had people who tell me, well, I have extended my line of sight by installing a high-definition micro camera on the front of the vehicle. Therefore, I can see beyond that up to five or six miles away. It's not natural. That's technology augmentation. They can push it. And let me tell you, people will push that. What are the physiological and psychological hazards do UAS pilots? Well, if there are no UAS pilots, no. However, what about if you have now a UAS operator flying in another aircraft, and from that aircraft operating the UAS, now the remote operator is exposed to the same in-flight environment as if he or she was pilot. So should we apply the same class 1, class 2, or class 3 medical certificate? Right now, we haven't defined that. But that has already happened, that they're flying from another aircraft. And once again, the solution is not just to ask the Air Force or the Army or the Navy what they're doing, because each of them are doing it differently. Now, obviously, if you have the person exposed to the environment, I'm not going to go around, but you have the individual exposure and risk factors that we have, like if he or she was a pilot. Now, what about UAS operator fatigue? That's a big deal, too. In fact, we are having ultra-long flights with UAS. For pilots, you have a daily time limit, no more than eight hours per day, week limit, month limit, limit, as far as flight time limitations. I think we have a time limitation. We do not have any regulations for drones. Now, what about if you're flying or operating one of the big ones that die short? That's a potentially huge impact. So, but if we do not have the regulations telling them, look, you could not have them working there for more than eight hours. And let me tell you, some of them are operating 10 to 12 hours. So now, if he's a remote operator, should we use the equivalent of a pilot medical exam? Or an air traffic controller medical exam? Which one? Because now the person is not in the vehicle, so it should be closer to equivalent to an air traffic controller. What about the physical hazards to UAS pilots? And now we're going to the occupational area. We have been tracking all the injuries, hand, finger, injuries, cuts, amputations of fingers, and these are actually impacting the operators, okay? The ones, particularly when they go, they fly the drone, and they're bringing the drone back, and they don't stop it on time, and they crash the drone against themselves. That's what we see. So, here you see, actually, also earlobe amputations, nose cuts. We have had eyeball perforations. So, what about the physical hazards to third parties? Those who are not even involved with the operation? We're thinking about that, because it is not theoretical. It is happening. Do you remember a couple of years ago, the New York Marathon? They became a big deal because of this that happened. Well, this led to something very interesting. Who is liable here? The manufacturer of the drone versus the operator of the drone versus the organizers of the marathon who allowed and requested the service to be doing this. They sued everybody. That's standard. That's standard. Now, here, see, all the injuries just among the non, the only involved part here. Now, let me show you a chart. The yearly distribution of drone-related injury trends in the U.S. emergency medical departments. We're tracking these from ERs. We're not getting information directly from the operators. It's who shows up at an ER because of a UAS or a drone injury. So, here, you see the trends. They went down 18 and 19, but that probably had to do with the system of reporting that it is not our system. But now, look at here, the difference between males and females, which is no surprise, because I told you both are men, not women. But then you see on the right chart the most common in your body parts. Obviously, the fingers. Then you have the head, number two, lower extremities, and the torso. And then the type of injury, obviously, most of them are lacerations, but you can get all the point to even amputations. So, we have been doing some studies in conjunction with universities to try to determine what is the mechanism of injury, what kind of the severity of injuries. Now, let me show you this one. This is not in the United States. It's someplace else. If you go to that cafe, you get your drinks right there. But if you want to eat something, you order it via your cell phone, and they will deliver the food by drone. Now, just look at that. You don't see the blades turning. So, they better make sure that the drones are on the floor. Do you want your food on the floor? If they try to reach that, they are going to get hurt. Who is going to be liable here? My goodness. At least that's not in the U.S. What about the occupational hazards to UAS pilots? And we started learning this from military aviation. Isn't it amazing that we still have not learned the lesson that when we design vehicles, and it can be flying vehicles or ground vehicles, that we need to pay attention to the human-machine interface and the ergonomics? Well, we started seeing increasing injuries at the level of neck, because repetitive neck strain. If instead of having a lot of the outside, having those cranes that you use the most, you use the top ones, you spend hours doing this. Well, of course, repetitive neck injury. And what about the equivalent of carpal tunnel syndrome? Same thing. Because you have to determine how much force, what would be the angles of mobility of the joystick, whatever. So, finally, we're paying attention to that stuff. But it's not just the control room. If you have a remote unit, now it's even more challenging, because you may be moving your neck even more. You're in the outside environment, so you're exposed to the environment itself. What about glare? When you are trying to see what's in the screen of the remote unit, and then you have full sunlight there, exposure to radiation, to dust, to water, even the fumes, not all of the drones are electric, okay? So, there are all the kinds of issues that we need to pay attention to. So, we can say that pilotless UAS operations eliminate all the medical, physiological, and physical and occupational assets. Yes, they do. What about the risks to the public? We still have to think about the people on the ground. Now, there are systems like this one that is being used for agricultural purposes. Okay, give me a second, I don't know what's going on. Okay, this one is, you actually launch, this UAS is going to actually, inside the box, the box has a small elevator. It will actually do monitoring before and after you apply the insecticides, the fungicides, or fertilizer, and automatically will fly their stuff, and then come back automatically. By the way, the tractor is also fully automated. So, there is also communication within the tractor to coordinate with the drone, so that they don't collapse and crash with each other, but also make sure that that one is following what the tractor is applying on the field. What about the human factors of air traffic control? Can you imagine putting transponders in 850,000 civilian drones in the United States? What would be the impact on the air traffic controllers? Are they going to be monitoring the whole thing? Forget it. So, how do we make sure that they are sharing the same airspace, and not necessarily restricted areas only, but how do we make sure that the level of safety that we have today is going to be preserved? That's another challenge right there. Now, let me jump into advanced mobility vehicles. Now, we're talking about bigger ones. Actually, that's a partial. We have now, gosh, about 45 different designs of advanced mobility vehicles, carrying people with no passengers. They are designing them from the beginning, with no controls on board. The way we learned about that is because one of them that went to be certified this year, we told that operator, well, can you, in the meantime, put a pilot on board, have the pilot operate the vehicle until we are satisfied that it's safe enough? Oh, so you're asking us to redesign the vehicle. We don't have control systems on board. We don't. So, you cannot do that, and of course, bad FAA, we cannot do that. So, they will have another big question. Do we know the reliability of lithium-ion batteries for a propulsion system? And we know, remember what happened with the batteries in the Boeing 787? Now we're talking about larger batteries flying there. What's the reliability of electrical engines in aircraft? We don't have enough experience, so we have to learn very fast. So, depending upon where you are, if you are in a rural area, suburban, urban, any type of operation that you can allow, so I'm not going to spend time here, but also types of applications. So you can go from carrying cargo to carrying people from different locations. The business case right now for corporate organizations, like these, put the helipad on top of their building in the middle of the New York City. And now instead of just taking those people to the airport, we'll actually go to the destination with the advanced mobility vehicle. So the concepts of operation are incredible. So let me show you another example. This one, at this point, is for one pilot from Japan. But start paying attention to the location of the engines and the location of the propellers. So here, it's approximately at the belly level. So you've got to make sure that when you get out of it, all of the blades are completely stopped. Because people do not pay attention. I will show you some examples of people that are crazy. Now, that's a better design. You put them away from the people. And in fact, this is being demonstrated to the US Army and several others. And not only that, but you see that many engines, you can actually still fly your vehicle with half of the motors operating. And if everything goes wrong, what else can you do? You mount in the center of this disk, a ballistically deployed parachute, and then you bring the entire vehicle down with the parachute. Just like what we have been doing with the Cirrus. Just like that. In fact, the Cirrus is going into aircraft. Some of you may not know, but this is a John Levy aircraft, high performance, that you can bring the entire airplane down if something fails. It has saved close to 350 pilots since it was implemented. Then this one, Joby. That's the one that we're dealing with right now. They want to get their certification as soon as possible. And this is going to be for initially two, but then it can be expanded to two other seats in the back. Then you have the ShoreFly flying car. It was shown first at the Paris Air Show in 2017. They got their development. They want to get licensing here in the United States. Now, this is the one that probably you've seen in the news, the Ehang from China. We just read last week, they will start operations in Shanghai with that, and they have no regulatory standards. So I guess we're going to learn from their operations and see what's their experience, and maybe we're going to modify our approach here. The helicopter. I love this one, developed in Germany. At this point, it's a two-seater. Yes, you see control there for the pilot, because that was the initial thing, but they started flying with no idle to abort. And in fact, it went to Ashburn in 2021, but it was giving demonstration flights in Ashkash, not with people on board, you have to do that. And they didn't fly that much their sports version, the Velocity. So another one is this one that it started in 2017, but we, the FAA, told them that, well, they need to address some aerodynamics, particularly on the fans on the front wing right there. They have changed that, and they're already working on the production versions. For five and seven seats. Boeing initially tried to get into the business of doing this stuff, but they said, look, we are used to pilot there. So yes, they did some testing with this one. What was the next step? Forget about that. They just bought this company for $150 million. So they're going to profit from that one. And actually, they happen to love this design, because from a safety point of view, it's a lot better. Number one, it has a wing, which means it has lift. Means that if you lose power, you can still try to glide this thing to the ground, even with unpowered. It has this 36, so it's 12. 12 for just for takeoff. But then you have the tail engine that is going to give you the propulsion. So I think this one is safer than many of the other ones, just because it looks a lot better, similar to a general aviation aircraft. Now, this is one of the latest concepts. In fact, we got the briefing last month at the FAA that they have plenty of money that they're investing in this company. We're talking about at least $200 million going of influx money to have this development. Now, the Paris Olympics in 2024, this is the real vehicle. Airbus is developing that. They want to use that vehicle in the Winter Olympics to transport Olympians and VIPs between venues. So I think it's challenging to say that it will be certified in 2024, which is next year. Now you put high visibility people inside the vehicle. Good luck. I hope that they don't do anything wrong. And they'll solve it. Here's another problem. That if you are too flexible with one company and something wrong happens, that has a huge impact on the entire industry. It's not just that. It's the entire industry, all of the other manufacturers. Because why? Why it happens in many cases. We have an accident and initially the FAA is over. You have to put more regulations into that. And more and more regulations, of course, can impede the development of the industry. So we have to deal with that. Now, this one may look like a science fiction vehicle. It's a real vehicle from the UK. They actually went to demonstrate this to Dubai in 2021. One of the princes in Dubai wanted to buy it on the spot. So they told him, look, it's not certified by anybody. We don't care you're in Dubai. One of my brothers is in charge of the Civil Aviation Authority. So we can... No, we're not going to take the liability of doing that. Now, the other thing that is amazing, and that's happening first in the UK, not in the US, is this. They are building the first Orban airport, it's called Air One, between Hyundai, Coventry City Council, and the UK government. Specifically for advanced air mobility operations. And in fact, our deputy FAA administrator two cycles ago is the chief consultant and advisor to Hyundai on this particular type of corporation. It is amazing what they're doing. Because also Hyundai is developing their own dream. I mean, their own advanced air mobility vehicle. So they have... They're thinking of the business. They're already building the port. Now they're going to fly their own advanced mobility vehicle. So that looks great. What about the medical requirements for pilots? Well, it depends. As I said, if there is an optional pilot, we can decide what kind of physical exam will be required. What about evolving from a pilot to a remote operator? And that was the approach, for example, by the US Navy. The US Navy, when they started operating drones, they didn't have just a technician flying them. For the ones that are not fully automated. But it was a pilot. Had to be a qualified pilot. Is that the right model? You said before you have to be a pilot or technician that you train as a remote pilot from scratch. So we're looking into those different approaches. And then the medically monitored remote operator. Let's say that, yes, in fact, you have a remote operator. If you do monitoring, what do you monitor? Here's another big twist. Most of the biomedical monitors that are available today do not work in the air. They are affected by changes in barometric pressure, acceleration, vibration, temperature. To the point that even when we started having some issues with the F-22 and F-35, the solid incapacitations in flight. You see, why don't we do biomedical monitoring to see what's going on? Finally, a sensor suite is going to be finished this year to be able to put it there. And we still don't know if it is going to be completely error-free from that type of operational condition. So NASA, even less, the assumption is that when we have NASA astronauts flying in the ISS, that they are continuously being biomedical monitored. No way. Only they are inside the extravehicular activity suit doing some maintenance outside the space station. But as a matter of routine, there is no biomedical monitoring going on. If you think about Fitbits and all of these works, there was an excellent study, and this is ground study, done about three years ago. They collected every single one that was available in the history. They determined that the error rate of those was close to 25% in the readings. All of them, okay? Why? Because if I have something in my wrist, like I do, I use my hands a lot, I'm doing this, the Fitbit is telling me that I'm walking. I'm not walking. It's just moving my wrist. So from that perspective, it's better to have one that you can put on your shoulder, or that you can put here, attached to, or even better one, that didn't exist today. Just put it around your ankle. Now, the one around the ankle, it will give you an indication. Unless you're standing, and then you're moving your foot, then of course it will tell you that you're... Let me jump from this one. What about psychological and physiological hazards to the occupants? Since there are no pilots in Advanced Air Mobility, obviously, we need to pay attention to that. Now, let me ask you a question. Of all the people who fly on board commercial aircraft, what percentage pays attention to the flight attendants, to the safety briefing? I don't think the question was how many times you've heard it. And that is a good comment, because that's optioning that every airplane is the same. Nope. Depending upon the size of the airplane is how many exits, how... We did some studies on emergency evacuations, not necessarily because of an accident, but precautionary vacations. Most people will try to get out of the aircraft using the same door that they used to board the aircraft. And that has killed people in the past when the nearest exit was just behind them, but they were not paying attention. And not only that, you cannot see the exits. If you already have smoke inside the vehicle, you cannot see your hand at this distance. If you get the chance to come to the institute in Oklahoma City, we have a flexible evacuation simulator. We can put up to 170 people inside. It moves and it simulates a final crash position. And we fill it with theatrical smoke. That's an eye-opening experience that we'll never forget for the rest of your life. Because now you know that you have to always count the number of seats away from you where the nearest exit is, because you will not see it. The floor lights, those are the only lights that you can see because of the smoke. We block anything that is from the belly up. We develop the floor lights at the institute. So, but then after that, let's say that that happens night time, there is no way that there will be any light coming from the outside either. So the worst case scenario, there is a 90-second rule, and that is for airplanes that have 46 or more. That airplane inside the hangar, all of the lights turned off with half of the doors blocked. And a single passenger has to be evacuated in 90 seconds or less, or more or less. If it is not, we do not certify it. We certify the Airbus 380 with 853 passengers and 25 crew members inside the hangar in Germany. Complete darkness, was evacuated in 84 seconds. Where did they obtain the people to do their test? Sports facilities in Europe. There is nothing that says that you can use a representative sample of the population, but you don't have to have people with disabilities, you don't have children, you cannot get your luggage. And people do that in real emergency evacuation. So physical hazards to occupants, and I have six minutes left. Start thinking, no flight attendants, and unless they have ground crews, just for that purpose. And I'm showing there a wheelchair because that's another challenge this year. We were mandated by Congress this year that we have to do the research with some established regulations that passengers that arrive with their own wheelchair, until being transferred to the transport chair and then sit in another seat, that they should have empty spaces inside the airplane where you with your own wheelchair get to that place, anchor your wheelchair to the floor of the aircraft, and then fly like that. We do not do crash testing of wheelchairs. We do not get involved with the restraint systems of the wheelchairs. But believe me, we have to issue a report next year as to what are we going to do. So another big challenge right there. And it's not only there, I don't know if you heard this, but both NASA and the European Space Agency and also the US Air Force, they have to increase the number of silos who have certain types of disabilities. And that includes, if it is a pilot of very short stature, just because of not being compatible with the design of the seats, but they should be accommodated, somebody with a prosthetic leg or somebody with one leg significantly shorter than the other leg, those will have to be accommodated for selection purposes. We're dealing with that. So now they officially, at NASA, is the para-astronaut problem. I'm serious, and we're having discussions about that. Now, here's the people, as I mentioned, passengers do not pay attention to anything. We have injuries and fatalities, people not paying attention in civil aviation operations, people walking through the propeller when the propeller is still turning, or even ground personnel being sucked by jet engines when the jet engine is still going on, and it has so much suction that it goes to the inlet of the jet engine. So we cannot rely on people using common sense or at least paying attention to don't go there. And now they are going to be doing things on their own. That's a little bit worrisome. Now, as far as crash warnings, I love this one because the technology, we also do crash testing at the Institute in Oklahoma City. All of these systems are being offered now to the advanced air mobility operators. So if you introduce, for example, energy absorbing structures, not only the structure of the vehicle. Do you know what is the current standard in the commercial airline industry for the tolerance of seats for passengers? How many Gs are they supposed to stand? 16. 16 Gs. And we're not fancy like in the Army that you have shock absorbers and special tech. This is just your normal seat that you use on board. And by the way, this is trivial. We were asked, well, what is the best approach if you're a passenger in one of those airline aircraft? If the material of the cushion is gel versus foam versus gel foam, what's the ideal situation? No cushion at all. Because when you put the cushion, now you could slide a little bit sideways. And if you have a crash, you will have no impact on yours. So we should be flying with no cushions. Essentially, our bugs against the hard seat. We cannot do that. We would not be allowed to make it mandatory. Another one in business class, first class, we started seeing some injuries, lower back injuries and pelvic injuries among passengers flying in business class and first class. We thought, wow, they are oblique seats. They're not aligned with the aircraft. So if you have a hard landing instead of having this motion, now you're sitting this way. So your upper torso will do this. That's leading to the lower back injuries. Now that's in what type of aircraft? Any aircraft that has oblique seats. Oh, oblique seats. Oblique seats, yeah. Yeah. Because I was going to say most, I fly, you know, I know I see a lot of the people and they're all front back, front back, you know, but they're not oriented, you know, oblique, except for certain foreign aircraft companies or businesses. As they expire, they'll get renewed with hernia. Or in general, obviously, for business class and first class. Or could the pharmacy just flip, just not send to sign a brand new contract? Basically, that contract will be re-assigned, right? And they will think about 30 seats, right? Yeah. And for that, we have a solution, because we did a test. Now, the new thing that you are starting to see when you fly Southwest Airlines and Virginia Airlines, to see bulky seatbelts. If it is bulky, there is an airbag right there. And that airbag, if you crash, will deploy in front of you so that you don't hit the back of the seat in front of you, even if you don't have the brace position. Now, what's the best position in case that you crash? The best position there is, in sitting, put your chest against your legs and your arms behind, because now the only thing that may go up in the crash is your legs, just a little bit. But I cannot do it in normal class. Yeah, yes. What's the second best position? You put your hands on the back of the seat in front of you and your forehead right against the back of the seat. So instead of hitting it, you go down with it and you go from minor facial or neck injuries to no injuries at all. It's amazing. We did the tests at the Institute too. Yes, sir. Even if it actually seemed to fly back, we don't want to see where we've been. You know, the only airline that was doing that, if you remember years ago, Southwest Airlines? You were next to the bulk. Yeah, I am. Bulkhead? Yeah, yeah. Those were the last seats to be used by people because people hate to be accelerated backwards. So now you go to Southwest, every single seat faces forward because of that reason. Now, most airplanes, who is flying back, who is flying backwards or sitting in the plane? The flight attendants. We want them to survive and we help other people get out of the aircraft. That's what we're trying to do. But we should all be flying backwards. In British Aircraft Transport, the tributary sports, they used to have them all facing the rear. This will tell you that the cod all faces back. Yeah, yeah. No, it's easier. You're trapped and attached. So trapped inside a galaxy? Yeah, yep. Well, I thought that. You used to tell me I was always asked about it. Well, yeah, but you've got to pull your head out. OK, I have one minute left. I guess I can leave one minute for questions. Yeah. Yes. So don't you say when you go to the road or don't you don't know where they start by somebody getting out? Are the doors automatically are they locked and they don't unlock until it's done with? That's a good question. But I will tell you what is happening in governmental aviation. Right now, if you are flying on those seats that are next to the exit over the wing, those are plug doors or plug hatches. There are two different types. The one that you remove and the one that you just activate and it will open up outwards. Now, the one that you remove, and that's another tip, never, please, never, if you remove it, put it on the seats. And that's what they tell you, because he's going to fall and now he's going to interfere with evacuation of other people. What you do is you remove it and throw it out. And when you remove it, never stand next to that exit. You do a seating, you create with your elbow some space with your handle that went and throw it out. And then you get up. If you stand, they will push you against the hatch and you cannot open it. Okay. Thank you very much. That's it.

aerospace medicine

aviation

emerging technologies

unmanned aerial systems

biomedical monitoring

drones

safety concerns

automated flight systems

human behavioral factors

industry collaboration