Daily data showing UK flight numbers and rolling seven-day average, including flights to, from, and within the UK. These are official statistics in development. Source: EUROCONTROL.

The number of flights performed globally by the airline industry has increased steadily since the early 2000s and reached **** million in 2019. However, due to the coronavirus pandemic, the number of flights dropped to **** million in 2020. The flight volume increased again in the following years and was forecasted to reach ** million in 2025.

For the purposes of this paper, the National Airspace System (NAS) encompasses the operations of all aircraft which are subject to air traffic control procedures. The NAS is a highly complex dynamic system that is sensitive to aeronautical decision-making and risk management skills. In order to ensure a healthy system with safe flights a systematic approach to anomaly detection is very important when evaluating a given set of circumstances and for determination of the best possible course of action. Given the fact that the NAS is a vast and loosely integrated network of systems, it requires improved safety assurance capabilities to maintain an extremely low accident rate under increasingly dense operating conditions. Data mining based tools and techniques are required to support and aid operators’ (such as pilots, management, or policy makers) overall decision-making capacity. Within the NAS, the ability to analyze fleetwide aircraft data autonomously is still considered a significantly challenging task. For our purposes a fleet is defined as a group of aircraft sharing generally compatible parameter lists. Here, in this effort, we aim at developing a system level analysis scheme. In this paper we address the capability for detection of fleetwide anomalies as they occur, which itself is an important initiative toward the safety of the real-world flight operations. The flight data recorders archive millions of data points with valuable information on flights everyday. The operational parameters consist of both continuous and discrete (binary & categorical) data from several critical subsystems and numerous complex procedures. In this paper, we discuss a system level anomaly detection approach based on the theory of kernel learning to detect potential safety anomalies in a very large data base of commercial aircraft. We also demonstrate that the proposed approach uncovers some operationally significant events due to environmental, mechanical, and human factors issues in high dimensional, multivariate Flight Operations Quality Assurance (FOQA) data. We present the results of our detection algorithms on real FOQA data from a regional carrier.

Passengers enplaned and deplaned at Canadian airports, annual.

This dataset contains data related to Air Traffic Management hotspots. Hotspots are created in the European airspaces when capacity for some pieces of airspace are foreseen to be infringed due to weather, congestion, strikes, etc. This anonymised dataset records around 5900 hotspots happening at 22 major European airports. These hotspots are generated through a simulator called Mercury that is fed with real data (in particular, real capacity reduction that happened in Europe for over a year, schedules etc) and simulates a day of operation, randomising events like delays, cancellation etc. More details on mercury can be found here [1] and [2].

The data, anonymised in terms of airports and airlines, is a dictionary which is structured as follows:

- the top level key is the id of the airport, the value is list a of all regulations available for this airport.

- each item of the list is a dictionary, with keys:

-- 'slot_times': list of all slots available to flights for this hotspot/regulation, in minutes since midnight.

-- 'etas': list of initial estimated arrival times of flights involved in the regulation, in minutes since midnight.

-- 'flight_ids': list of flight ids (in the same order than etas)

-- 'cost_vectors': list of cost vectors. Each item is a list itself, of length equal to the slot_times list. Each element of that list is the estimated cost that the airline owning the flight would incur, were the flight be assigned to this slot, in terms of: maintenance, crew, rebooking fees, market value loss, and curfew infringement, in 2014 euros. This cost is computed within the Mercury model and is based on [3].

-- 'airlines_flights': dictionary whose keys are airline ids and values are lists of ids of flights owned by the airline.

[1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0968090X21003600

[2] G. Gurtner, L. Delgado, and D.Valput, “An agent-based model for air transportation to capture network effects in assessing delay management mechanisms”, Transportation Research Part C: emerging Technologies, 2021.

Pre-print available here: https://westminsterresearch.westminster.ac.uk/item/v956w/an-agent-based-model-for-air-transportation-to-capture-network-effects-in-assessing-delay-management-mechanisms

[3] A. J. Cook and G. Tanner, “European airline delay cost reference values - updated and extended values (Version 4.1),” University of Westminster, London, 2015a

The National Security UAS Flight Restrictions in this dataset are currently pending and will become effective on November 07, 2019. The FAA, pursuant to Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) § 99.7, Special security instructions (SSI), has prohibited all UAS flight operations within the airspace defined under NOTAM FDC 7/7282 . Specific locations are described in the table and on the interactive map provided on this website. The TFRs extend from the surface up to 400 feet Above Ground Level (AGL), apply to all types and purposes of UAS flight operations, and remain in effect 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

WHAT UAS FLIGHT RESTRICTIONS HAVE BEEN PUT INTO PLACE?

At the request of and pursuant to agreements with the Department of Defense and U.S. Federal security and intelligence agencies (“sponsoring Federal agencies”), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has implemented Special Security Instructions for Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS), issued as temporary flight restrictions (TFR) over select national security sensitive facilities located throughout the U.S. These TFRs are established within the lateral boundaries of these facilities and extend from surface to 400 feet Above Ground Level (AGL). These TFRs apply to all UAS operations specifically including:

· Public aircraft operations conducted in accordance with a Certificate of Authorization or Waiver (COA).

· Civil aircraft operations (other than model aircraft), including those conducted in accordance with a COA and those conducted in accordance with the FAA’s small UAS Rule, 14 CFR Part 107.

· Model Aircraft operations conducted in accordance with 14 CFR Part 101, Subpart E.

UAS operators must comply with these flight restrictions in addition to all other applicable Federal Aviation Regulations, including but not limited to, requirements to secure an FAA airspace authorization and/or waiver prior to flying in the airspace where a TFR is in effect.

The information on this website complements Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) NOTAM FDC 7/7282, which generally notifies the public about these temporary flight restrictions (TFR). This website provides UAS operators with more detailed information about these TFRs, including:

· An explanation of what is restricted

· A table listing the selected facilities over which a TFR has been established

· An interactive map providing visual depictions and information about specific TFRs and geospatial (GIS) data that can be downloaded

· An explanation of which UAS operations may be able to access the airspace within a TFR, including instructions for submitting a request

· Reminders on other requirements for UAS operations

WHAT HAPPENS IF I VIOLATE A TEMPORARY FLIGHT RESTRICTION (TFR)?

The FAA classifies the airspace encompassed by these temporary flight restrictions (TFRs) as “national defense airspace” in accordance with Title 49 of the United States Code (USC) § 40103(b)(3). Violations of these TFRs may prompt the following enforcement actions:

A. The U.S. Government may pursue criminal charges, including charges under Title 49 U.S.C § 46307.

B. The FAA may take administrative action, including imposing civil penalties and the revoking FAA certificates and authorizations to operate UAS under Title 49 U.S.C. §§ 44709 and 46301.

WHAT ARE THE BASIC FLIGHT RESTRICTIONS?

The FAA, pursuant to Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) § 99.7, Special security instructions (SSI), has prohibited all UAS flight operations within the airspace defined under NOTAM FDC 7/7282. Specific locations are described in the table and on the interactive map provided on this website. The TFRs extend from the surface up to 400 feet Above Ground Level (AGL), apply to all types and purposes of UAS flight operations, and remain in effect 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

See the full text of NOTAM FDC 7/7282 here.

ARE THERE EXCEPTIONS FOR UAS OPERATIONS TO ACCESS A TFR?

The FAA has authorized UAS operations within the TFRs if those flights are in compliance with the applicable requirements listed below:

1) The UAS flight operation has been pre-approved by the designated facility contact based on criteria established by the sponsoring federal agency in coordination with the FAA. Note: UAS operators seeking approval to operate in one of the TFRs defined in this website under this provision must contact the facility’s designated point of contact identified in the table or interactive map, and secure permission to operate within the airspace prior to entry. Pre-approval from the facility or sponsoring agency does not substitute for compliance with FAA requirements. Depending on the nature of the proposed operation and Class of airspace, waiver or authorization may be needed from the FAA before flight. For more information visit our website at www.faa.gov/uas

2). The UAS flight operation is conducted in direct support of an active national defense, homeland security, law enforcement, firefighting, search and rescue, or disaster response mission, and prior notification has been provided to the designated facility contact. Note: UAS operators seeking approval to operate in one of the TFRs defined in this website under this provision must contact the facility’s designated point of contact identified in the table or interactive map, and provide notification prior to entering the airspace. These operators must make every effort to coordinate with the designated facility to deconflict the UAS flight operation with any safety or security concerns stated by the facility and/or sponsoring Federal agency.

3). The UAS flight operation is conducted in direct support of a significant and urgent governmental interest and is approved by the FAA’s System Operations Support Center (SOSC) in advance of entering the TFR. Note: UAS operators, that meet the criteria for thisprovision , may also qualify for access under provision 2 outlined above and are encouraged to coordinate directly with the facility’s designated point of contact identified in the table or interactive map, by providing notification prior to entering the airspace and taking into consideration any safety or security concerns stated by the facility and/or sponsoring Federal agency.

For urgent and time sensitive requests, contact the FAA’s SOSC at (202) 267-8276 for expedited assistance. The FAA’s SOSC will coordinate with the facility and/or sponsoring Federal agency as appropriate.

ARE THERE OTHER REQUIREMENTS TO OPERATE IN A TFR IN ADDITION TO THE EXCEPTIONS?

Separate and distinct from any of the conditions cited above used to gain access to a TFR defined by NOTAM FDC 7/7282 and described in this website, UAS operators must comply with all applicable Federal Aviation Regulations. For example:

For Model Aircraft:

· Comply with 14 CFR Part 101, Subpart E

NOTE: These provisions require model aircraft operators to notify any airport operator and air traffic control tower within 5 miles of the intended area of flight.

For All Other UAS Operators:

· Comply with a Public Aircraft Certificate of Authorization or Waiver (COA), or

· Comply with 14 CFR Part107, Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems, or

· Comply with Section 333 Exemption and a Certificate of Authorization or Waiver (COA)

NOTE: Public and civil UAS operators flying under the provisions of a COA or 14 CFR Part 107 may need to secure further airspace authorizations or waivers in order to conduct the proposed flight operation in controlled airspace, which may overlap with one of the TFRs defined by NOTAM FDC 7/7282 and this website. In those cases, these operators should follow the pre-existing procedures outlined below.

A. Non-emergency requests for UAS airspace authorizations and waivers must be submitted using the regular process as follows:

· 14 CFR Part 107 requests for airspace authorizations and waivers must be submitted to the FAA athttps://www.faa.gov/uas/request_waiver/

·
Section 333 Exemption holders may request a site specific COA at https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/uas/portal.jsp

· Public aircraft operators without an existing authorization to operate must secure a public COA athttps://ioeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/Welcome.jsp

B. Emergency requests for UAS authorizations/waivers for missions that directly support significant and urgent governmental interests (e.g., active national defense, homeland security, law enforcement, and emergency operations missions), which cannot be supported by the FAA’s routine authorization/waiver processes should be referred to the SOSC at (202) 267-8276

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS?

If you have any general questions regarding UAS operations, please refer to the following FAA webpage: https://www.faa.gov/uas/ , or contact the FAA by email at uashelp@faa.gov or by phone at (844) FLY-MY-UA.

If you have any additional questions regarding the TFRs defined by NOTAM FDC 7/7282 and this website, please contact the FAA SOSC at (202) 267-8276.

Disclaimers

The restrictions depicted on this site reflect temporary flight restrictions issued for national security reasons at select U.S. Federal facilities. There may be additional temporary flight restrictions that prohibit UAS and manned flight in effect in your area. Seehttp://tfr.faa.gov/tfr2/list.html for additional information on flight restrictions that may be in effect in your area before operating your UAS.

This dataset contains predictions of whether temperature inversions will occur at locations in Allegheny County.

This dataset is still under active development and should be considered to be in "beta".

Motivation

Temperature inversions occur when there is a warmer layer of air above the air at or near ground level. This represents a reversal of the normal flow of heat near the earth and results in the cooler air being trapped near the ground. Temperature inversions can lead to the formation of fog or dew. Pollution or smoke from fires, which would rise and dissipate in the atmosphere under normal conditions, become trapped near the ground in a temperature inversion, potentially leading to hazardous concentrations of pollutants in the air.

This dataset was extracted from NASA's Goddard Earth Observing System Forward-Processing (GEOS-FP) system as a collaboration between NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center and the Western Pennsylvania Regional Data Center, to provide access to 1-day, 3-day, and 5-day predictions of temperature inversions in Allegheny County.

Preprocessing/Formatting/Methodology

This dataset is generated using data-processing scripts written by partners at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center. The scripts extract from the GEOS-FP model the predicted air temperature as a function of latitude/longitude/date/height, and then, starting near surface level, search upward for the height of the local maximum in air temperature. This determines whether a temperature inversion is expected.

Each record is a prediction of whether there will be a temperature inversion, for a particular day at 12pm UTC (7am EST) within five days after the prediction, and for a particular cell in a coarse grid overlaying Allegheny County. If an inversion is predicted, the height of top of the inversion above the ground and the temperature difference between the ground and the top of the inversion are given, as well as an estimate of the inversion strength on a scale of 0 to 4 (where the strength of the inversion is calculated based on the value of the temperature difference). For some locations, we've also added the name of a place (e.g., "Pittsburgh" or "Monroeville") within that cell, to make look-ups easier.

Additionally, we've created forecast maps for the region and 5-day timeline forecasts (for particular locations) of both inversion strength and PM2.5 concentration.

Known Uses

If you are using this dataset, please write to the data steward (listed below) and let us know! Your stories support the development of future datasets like this.

Recommended Uses

This data could provide an early-warning system for certain kinds of unhealthy air-quality events, such as dangerously high PM_2.5 levels from wildfire-induced smog or pollution, trapped near the ground.

Known Limitations/Biases

The spatial resolution of the forecast is pretty coarse.

To validate the forecast, a comparison was made of its predictions with actual temperature-inversion measurements made by weather balloon (or sodar/RASS acoustic upper air profiler) by the Allegheny County Health Department Air Quality Office. The results are shown in this table, which is accompanied by some additional analysis. When the 1-day forecast predicted a strong or moderate inversion, there was about a 90% chance that it was historically correct, and when the 3-day or 5-day forecast confirmed this forecast for the same date, the accuracy increased, with more than 96% historical accuracy when confirmed by the 5-day forecast.

Also, sometimes the model results can not be computed on the expected schedule. (These delays are reported on the "geos5-fp-users" mailing list.) In these instances, the WPRDC's automated processes fall back to the previous day's forecasts; the forecast_version field provides the date and hour that the forecast simulation was started.

Related Datasets

The Allegheny County Health Department's measurement of pollutant concentrations (and other parameters) at several measurements stations are published in the Allegheny County Air Quality dataset.

We are also publishing a dataset that forecasts concentrations of three air quality parameters: carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and fine particulate matter (PM2.5).

Credits

This work is the result of a collaboration between the WPRDC and NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center. This dataset would not have been possible without the efforts of NASA Goddard Space Flight Center personnel to apply NASA's atmospheric models and domain expertise to the problem of forecasting temperature inversions, yielding this prototype forecast, tailored to Allegheny County. Thanks also to Jason Maranche and Angela Wilson of the Allegheny County Health Department's Air Quality Program for providing us with, and helping us understand, their historical temperature-inversion measurement data (used to validate the predictions).

The volume of air-freight transport in the United Arab Emirates was forecast to decrease between 2024 and 2029 by in total 0.02 billion ton-kilometers. This overall decrease does not happen continuously, notably not in 2026 and 2027. The volume of air-freight transport is estimated to amount to 14 billion ton-kilometers in 2029. As defined by Worldbank, air freight refers to the summated volume of freight, express and diplomatic bags carried across the various flight stages (from takeoff to the next landing). The forecast has been adjusted for the expected impact of COVID-19.The shown data are an excerpt of Statista's Key Market Indicators (KMI). The KMI are a collection of primary and secondary indicators on the macro-economic, demographic and technological environment in more than 150 countries and regions worldwide. All input data are sourced from international institutions, national statistical offices, and trade associations. All data has been are processed to generate comparable datasets (see supplementary notes under details for more information).Find more key insights for the volume of air-freight transport in countries like Oman and Israel.

Data set for the theme Cadastral parcels (CP) harmonised according to the INSPIRE Directive and data specification for ELF version 1.0. The data contain the boundaries of cadastral territories, parcels and parcel numbers. The data set is provided as open data (CC-BY 4.0 license). The data is based on ISKN (Cadastre Information System). Data are only available in those cadastral areas where the cadastral map is in digital form — (as at 10. 01. 2022 is 97.82 % of the territory of the Czech Republic, i.e. 77 150.84 km²). The data is generated daily (if any change occurs within the cadastral area). Data in GML 3.2.1 are valid against the XML schema for INSPIRE theme Cadastral parcels version 4.0 and against the schematic for spatial data ELF version 1.0. Data is compressed for download (ZIP). More cadastral Act 256/2013 Coll., Decree on the Land Registry No 357/2013 Coll., Decree on the Provision of Data No. 358/2013 Coll., as amended, and INSPIRE Data Specification on cadastral Parcels v 3.0.1.

As a result of the continued annual growth in global air traffic passenger demand, the number of airplanes that were involved in accidents is on the increase. Although the United States is ranked among the 20 countries with the highest quality of air infrastructure, the U.S. reports the highest number of civil airliner accidents worldwide. 2020 was the year with more plane crashes victims, despite fewer flights The number of people killed in accidents involving large commercial aircraft has risen globally in 2020, even though the number of commercial flights performed last year dropped by 57 percent to 16.4 million. More than half of the total number of deaths were recorded in January 2020, when an Ukrainian plane was shot down in Iranian airspace, a tragedy that killed 176 people. The second fatal incident took place in May, when a Pakistani airliner crashed, killing 97 people. Changes in aviation safety In terms of fatal accidents, it seems that aviation safety experienced some decline on a couple of parameters. For example, there were 0.37 jet hull losses per one million flights in 2016. In 2017, passenger flights recorded the safest year in world history, with only 0.11 jet hull losses per one million flights. In 2020, the region with the highest hull loss rate was the Commonwealth of Independent States. These figures do not take into account accidents involving military, training, private, cargo and helicopter flights.

The National Security UAS Flight Restrictions in this dataset are currently pending and will become effective on May 05, 2023. The FAA, pursuant to Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) § 99.7, Special security instructions (SSI), has prohibited all UAS flight operations within the airspace defined under NOTAM FDC 7/7282 . Specific locations are described in the table and on the interactive map provided on this website. The TFRs extend from the surface up to 400 feet Above Ground Level (AGL), apply to all types and purposes of UAS flight operations, and remain in effect 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. WHAT UAS FLIGHT RESTRICTIONS HAVE BEEN PUT INTO PLACE? At the request of and pursuant to agreements with the Department of Defense and U.S. Federal security and intelligence agencies (“sponsoring Federal agencies”), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has implemented Special Security Instructions for Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS), issued as temporary flight restrictions (TFR) over select national security sensitive facilities located throughout the U.S. These TFRs are established within the lateral boundaries of these facilities and extend from surface to 400 feet Above Ground Level (AGL). These TFRs apply to all UAS operations specifically including: · Public aircraft operations conducted in accordance with a Certificate of Authorization or Waiver (COA). · Civil aircraft operations (other than model aircraft), including those conducted in accordance with a COA and those conducted in accordance with the FAA’s small UAS Rule, 14 CFR Part 107. · Model Aircraft operations conducted in accordance with 14 CFR Part 101, Subpart E. UAS operators must comply with these flight restrictions in addition to all other applicable Federal Aviation Regulations, including but not limited to, requirements to secure an FAA airspace authorization and/or waiver prior to flying in the airspace where a TFR is in effect. The information on this website complements Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) NOTAM FDC 7/7282, which generally notifies the public about these temporary flight restrictions (TFR). This website provides UAS operators with more detailed information about these TFRs, including: · An explanation of what is restricted · A table listing the selected facilities over which a TFR has been established · An interactive map providing visual depictions and information about specific TFRs and geospatial (GIS) data that can be downloaded · An explanation of which UAS operations may be able to access the airspace within a TFR, including instructions for submitting a request · Reminders on other requirements for UAS operations WHAT HAPPENS IF I VIOLATE A TEMPORARY FLIGHT RESTRICTION (TFR)? The FAA classifies the airspace encompassed by these temporary flight restrictions (TFRs) as “national defense airspace” in accordance with Title 49 of the United States Code (USC) § 40103(b)(3). Violations of these TFRs may prompt the following enforcement actions: A. The U.S. Government may pursue criminal charges, including charges under Title 49 U.S.C § 46307. B. The FAA may take administrative action, including imposing civil penalties and the revoking FAA certificates and authorizations to operate UAS under Title 49 U.S.C. §§ 44709 and 46301. WHAT ARE THE BASIC FLIGHT RESTRICTIONS? The FAA, pursuant to Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) § 99.7, Special security instructions (SSI), has prohibited all UAS flight operations within the airspace defined under NOTAM FDC 7/7282. Specific locations are described in the table and on the interactive map provided on this website. The TFRs extend from the surface up to 400 feet Above Ground Level (AGL), apply to all types and purposes of UAS flight operations, and remain in effect 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. See the full text of NOTAM FDC 7/7282 here. ARE THERE EXCEPTIONS FOR UAS OPERATIONS TO ACCESS A TFR? The FAA has authorized UAS operations within the TFRs if those flights are in compliance with the applicable requirements listed below: 1) The UAS flight operation has been pre-approved by the designated facility contact based on criteria established by the sponsoring federal agency in coordination with the FAA. Note: UAS operators seeking approval to operate in one of the TFRs defined in this website under this provision must contact the facility’s designated point of contact identified in the table or interactive map, and secure permission to operate within the airspace prior to entry. Pre-approval from the facility or sponsoring agency does not substitute for compliance with FAA requirements. Depending on the nature of the proposed operation and Class of airspace, waiver or authorization may be needed from the FAA before flight. For more information visit our website at www.faa.gov/uas 2). The UAS flight operation is conducted in direct support of an active national defense, homeland security, law enforcement, firefighting, search and rescue, or disaster response mission, and prior notification has been provided to the designated facility contact. Note: UAS operators seeking approval to operate in one of the TFRs defined in this website under this provision must contact the facility’s designated point of contact identified in the table or interactive map, and provide notification prior to entering the airspace. These operators must make every effort to coordinate with the designated facility to deconflict the UAS flight operation with any safety or security concerns stated by the facility and/or sponsoring Federal agency. 3). The UAS flight operation is conducted in direct support of a significant and urgent governmental interest and is approved by the FAA’s System Operations Support Center (SOSC) in advance of entering the TFR. Note: UAS operators, that meet the criteria for thisprovision , may also qualify for access under provision 2 outlined above and are encouraged to coordinate directly with the facility’s designated point of contact identified in the table or interactive map, by providing notification prior to entering the airspace and taking into consideration any safety or security concerns stated by the facility and/or sponsoring Federal agency. For urgent and time sensitive requests, contact the FAA’s SOSC at (202) 267-8276 for expedited assistance. The FAA’s SOSC will coordinate with the facility and/or sponsoring Federal agency as appropriate. ARE THERE OTHER REQUIREMENTS TO OPERATE IN A TFR IN ADDITION TO THE EXCEPTIONS? Separate and distinct from any of the conditions cited above used to gain access to a TFR defined by NOTAM FDC 7/7282 and described in this website, UAS operators must comply with all applicable Federal Aviation Regulations. For example: For Model Aircraft: · Comply with 14 CFR Part 101, Subpart E NOTE: These provisions require model aircraft operators to notify any airport operator and air traffic control tower within 5 miles of the intended area of flight. For All Other UAS Operators: · Comply with a Public Aircraft Certificate of Authorization or Waiver (COA), or · Comply with 14 CFR Part107, Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems, or · Comply with Section 333 Exemption and a Certificate of Authorization or Waiver (COA) NOTE: Public and civil UAS operators flying under the provisions of a COA or 14 CFR Part 107 may need to secure further airspace authorizations or waivers in order to conduct the proposed flight operation in controlled airspace, which may overlap with one of the TFRs defined by NOTAM FDC 7/7282 and this website. In those cases, these operators should follow the pre-existing procedures outlined below. A. Non-emergency requests for UAS airspace authorizations and waivers must be submitted using the regular process as follows: · 14 CFR Part 107 requests for airspace authorizations and waivers must be submitted to the FAA at https://www.faa.gov/uas/request_waiver/ · Section 333 Exemption holders may request a site specific COA at https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/uas/portal.jsp · Public aircraft operators without an existing authorization to operate must secure a public COA athttps://ioeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/Welcome.jsp B. Emergency requests for UAS authorizations/waivers for missions that directly support significant and urgent governmental interests (e.g., active national defense, homeland security, law enforcement, and emergency operations missions), which cannot be supported by the FAA’s routine authorization/waiver processes should be referred to the SOSC at (202) 267-8276 ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? If you have any general questions regarding UAS operations, please refer to the following FAA webpage: https://www.faa.gov/uas/ , or contact the FAA by email at uashelp@faa.gov or by phone at (844) FLY-MY-UA. If you have any additional questions regarding the TFRs defined by NOTAM FDC 7/7282 and this website, please contact the FAA SOSC at (202) 267-8276. Disclaimers The restrictions depicted on this site reflect temporary flight restrictions issued for national security reasons at select U.S. Federal facilities. There may be additional temporary flight restrictions that prohibit UAS and manned flight in effect in your area. See https://tfr.faa.gov/tfr2/list.html for additional information on flight restrictions that may be in effect in your area before operating your UAS.

In the 2024/25 financial year, Qatar Airways revenues reached approximately 86 billion Qatari riyals. Launched in 1997, the state-owned airline, Qatar Airways, is based in Doha, Qatar, and headed by Mr. Badr Mohammed Al Meer. The airline’s hub is the Doha Hamad International Airport, one of the busiest airports, with circa 37 million passengers travelling through, as of 2016. Regional contextWith a revenue of 52 billion Qatar Riyals in the FY 2022, Qatar Airways became the second largest airline operating in the Middle East. In 2015, the number of airplane fleets leased in the Middle East increased to 43. The fleet size of the Qatar Airways Group grew to 207 airplanes by the year 2020. Qatar AirlineIn 2019, the airline transported a little over 29 million passengers to several of its 160 destinations. Besides handling passengers, The Qatar Airways Group also has a fast-growing cargo network based in Hamad International Airport, namely Qatar Airways Cargo. In 2014, the volume of air freight handled in the State of Qatar was just under 6 billion metric tons times kilometers travelled.

This dataset contains maternal reproductive output data, embryonic development data and offspring performance data for the Speckled Wood butterfly, Pararge aegeria. The data were collected from a laboratory experiment testing the hypothesis that repeat periods of intensive flight during female oviposition affects egg provisioning and reduces offspring performance when larval development occurs on drought stressed host plants. The experiment involved stimulating female butterflies to fly for 5 minutes for 3 periods during oviposition; removing eggs from 5 different days during oviposition to be monitored for hatching; and removing a larva on day of hatching to be reared on a drought stressed host plant. For each larva, development time from hatching to pupation, pupal mass and survival to eclose as an adult was recorded. On eclosion, each offspring adult was sexed and the thorax weighed. The overall aim of this experimental work was to explore one of the potential mechanisms for the impact of drought and habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Full details about this nonGeographicDataset can be found at https://doi.org/10.5285/82233733-237a-4fea-a5c1-88c734752279

Abstract1. Variation among species in their phenological responses to temperature change suggests that shifts in the relative timing of key life cycle events between interacting species are likely to occur under climate warming. However, it remains difficult to predict the prevalence and magnitude of these shifts given that there have been few comparisons of phenological sensitivities to temperature across interacting species. 2. Here, we used a broad-scale approach utilizing collection records to compare the temperature sensitivity of the timing of adult flight in butterflies vs. flowering of their potential nectar food plants (days per °C) across space and time in British Columbia, Canada. 3. On average, the phenology of both butterflies and plants advanced in response to warmer temperatures. However, the two taxa were differentially sensitive to temperature across space vs. across time, indicating the additional importance of nontemperature cues and/or local adaptation for many species. 4. Across butterfly–plant associations, flowering time was significantly more sensitive to temperature than the timing of butterfly flight and these sensitivities were not correlated. 4. Our results indicate that warming-driven shifts in the relative timing of life cycle events between butterflies and plants are likely to be prevalent, but that predicting the magnitude and direction of such changes in particular cases is going to require detailed, fine-scale data. Usage notesPhenological data for select plant species in British Columbia, CanadaThis data was compiled from the University of British Columbia Herbarium. Each row represents a specimen that was in flower at the time of collection. 'Accession' is the unique identifier associated with the specimen that is found in the herbarium database. 'Vegetation' is the type of vegetation (tree, shrub, herbaceous). 'Family' is the species' family. 'Day/month/year' is the date associated with the specimen. 'x' is the longitude and 'y' is the latitude associated with the record. These coordinates were either listed directly on the specimen or achieved by georeferencing by the museum or by the authors. Georeferencing was done using locality descriptions on the specimen. 'Uncertainty (in meters)' is the uncertainty associated with the geographic coordinates achieved by georeferencing that was quantified whenever possible.dryad_plants.csv

The ETA Forecast Trajectory Model was used to produce forecasts of air-parcel trajectories twice a day at three pressure levels over seven sites in Southern Africa for the period August 14, 2000 to September 23, 2000. These sites are Durban, Middleburg, Pietersburg, and Springbok, South Africa; Maun, Botswana; Mongu, Zambia; and Windhoek, Namibia. The twice daily three-dimensional wind field (at 0000 and 1200 UTC) was used as input to the trajectory model. By integrating the vertical motion of the air parcels over a period of time, the trajectory model was able to forecast the net vertical displacement of air parcels during 12-hour periods. The resulting trajectory plots represent the three-dimensional transport of air in time and can be used to examine what is happening in the low-to-mid troposphere during flight and ground-based observations. These levels are most significant in terms of the thermodynamic structure of the troposphere, especially the stable layers and accumulation of material between and below them, as well containing the major levels of subsidence over the subcontinent. The trajectory model output and thermodynamic profiles of the troposphere were used to position aircraft for sampling trace gases, aerosols and other species during the SAFARI 2000 field campaign and to predict regions of high aerosol and trace gas concentrations downwind.The model output data are daily forward and backward trajectory plots at 850 hPa, 700 hPa, and 500 hPa pressure levels for each location. The plots are provided as JPEG images with coordinate, date, and time stamps.

This case study investigates the social behavior of the giant honeybee (Apis dorsata) during mass flight activity (MFA), a critical aspect of colony functioning. This evolutionarily ancient species builds its nests on trees, cliffs, or man-made structures. A colony periodically transitions from a semi-quiescent state to MFA mode, typically up to four times a day for 5–10 min. During MFA, the colony undergoes a profound reorganization of roles, and its defense capabilities are temporarily lost as the top layer of the bee curtain peels off, making the colony less responsive to external threats. This period is thought to result in a temporary “blindness” to disturbances, increasing vulnerability. To investigate this, the study analyzes three episodes from a larger data set, each consisting of over 60,000 video frames and 4,000 infrared images, with a focus on the MFA phase. The colony was exposed to a wasp dummy designed to simulate a real threat, triggering shimmering waves when the bees were in a quiescent state. This setup allowed the study to assess how the colony's defensive readiness fluctuates during MFA. Each episode included up to 20 experimental sessions, in which the colony's responses to the wasp stimulus and the unstimulated situation were examined. Data were collected from five 11 × 11 cm quadrants on the nest surface. Thermal data were analyzed in conjunction with motion activity data from previous studies to understand the temporal and spatial dynamics of motion–heat coupling during MFA. Results show that the mouth zone of the nest acts as a command center for coordinating MFAs. Despite its temporary vulnerability during MFA, the colony can still detect and respond to external threats, although with reduced defense capabilities. This case study highlights the complex behavioral and physiological processes involved in MFA in A. dorsata and sheds light on the extent to which the colony maintains some level of defense capability despite the agitation that occurs during nest restructuring. Only for a short period of approximately 1 min is it virtually paralyzed by the external stimulation, showing signs of social thanatosis.