DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
The following is a final office action in response to the communication filed 05/15/2025. Claims 1-6, 8, and 10 have been amended. Claims 7, 9, 12 and 13 have been cancelled. Claims 1-6, 8, 10-11 and 14-15 are currently pending and have been examined.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments and remarks filed on 5/15/25 have been fully considered.
Applicant’s amendments overcome the objections to the specification.
Applicant’s amendments overcome the objections to the claims.
Applicant’s amendments overcome the previous U.S.C. §112(b) rejection.
Applicant’s arguments provided for the U.S.C. §103 rejections of claims 1-15 have been considered but are not persuasive.
(A) Applicant argues, “The present Action properly points out that Boriss does not explicitly teach wherein the azimuth antenna transmitter and/or the elevation antenna transmitter and/or the DME transmitter are placed aboard an unmanned aerial vehicle… Aldarwish fails to disclose or suggest these missing features. While Aldarwish discloses interceptor drones that might be provided in lieu of an Instrument Landing System (ILS), and that may provide information similar to that of an ILS system, Aldarwish fails to disclose an MLS azimuth antenna transmitter, an MLS elevation antenna transmitter, and an MLS distance measuring equipment (DME) transmitter, all integrated on the at least one unmanned aerial vehicle. The ILS and MLS systems are incompatible, require different hardware, and one cannot be simply replaced with another. Furthermore, an ILS system may be connected to a DME transmitter but generally does not include a DME transmitter. Still further, an ILS system does not include an MLS optical navigation system and Aldarwish is silent with respect to an MLS optical navigation system integrated on an unmanned vehicle,” (from remarks page 9).
As to point (A), Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant asserts that it would not be obvious to combine the drone-based ILS landing system of Aldarwish with the MLS system of Boriss due to the incompatibility and different hardware requirements of the two systems. While the Examiner acknowledges these stated differences, the examiner further notes the significant similarities between the ILS and MLS systems: they both use azimuth and elevation transmitters to send guidance signals to aircraft in the form of electromagnetic waves, they both accomplish the same task of guiding the aircraft to land using these signals, and MLS was developed as an improvement on and successor to ILS. Therefore, the Examiner considers that it would be obvious to replace the ILS transmitters on the drones of Aldarwish with MLS transmitters in order to accomplish the same landing guidance task using the more-advanced MLS system.
(B) Applicant argues, “In addition, the Boriss system lacks any disclosure related to an MLS optical navigation system at all, let alone integrated on an unmanned vehicle… Still further, an ILS system does not include an MLS optical navigation system and Aldarwish is silent with respect to an MLS optical navigation system integrated on an unmanned vehicle… Applicant notes the rejection of claim 9 with respect to Eluganti et al. (WO 2017/083430, "Eluganti"), however, Eluganti fails to disclose or suggest "an MLS optical navigation system integrated on the at least one unmanned aerial vehicle and configured to utilise a database comprising coordinates of reference objects." The Ground Based Augmentation System (GBAS) way points described in Eluganti's paragraph [0026] are used to provide corrections for a Global Positioning System (GPS) by providing corrections to improve the accuracy of an aircrafts' GPS navigation system. While Eluganti's unmanned aircraft may be able to validate visual markings using GPS data, Eluganti does not disclose a MLS optical navigation system integrated on at least one unmanned aerial vehicle and configured to utilise a database comprising coordinates of reference objects,” (from remarks pages 9-10).
As to point (B), Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant asserts that none of the above references teach an “MLS optical navigation system integrated on an unmanned vehicle”. Because an optical navigation system does not employ MLS signals, does not operate in the same range of the electromagnetic spectrum, and is not a standard part of an MLS system, Examiner interprets an MLS optical navigation system as an optical navigation system used in conjunction with and for the enhancement of an MLS navigation system. Eluganti in [0026] teaches using sensors on an unmanned aircraft to detect visual markings at the end of the runway for the development or validation of positioning information. Therefore, the examiner considers that Eluganti teaches an “optical navigation system integrated on an unmanned vehicle”. Furthermore, Eluganti teaches in [0025] that the same unmanned aircraft used for sensing visual markings is also used to test navigation aid systems such as an ILS. Using the system in conjunction with a closely-related navigational aid system such as MLS would therefore also have been obvious.
(C) Applicant argues, “At least for these reasons, the combination of Boriss and Aldarwish, and the combination of Boriss, Aldarwish, and Eluganti fails to disclose or suggest all the features of claim 1 and fails to render claim 1 unpatentable. Claims 2, 6, and 7 are patentable at least because of their dependencies and for the subject matter they recite,” (from remarks page 10).
As to point (C), see points (A) and (B).
(D) Applicant argues, “Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over Boriss in view of Aldarwish, and further in view of Tofte et al. (US 10,102,589, "Tofte"). Claim 3 depends from claim 1. Tofte fails to disclose or suggest the features of claim 1 missing from the combination of Boriss and Aldarwish, and as a result, the combination of Boriss, Aldarwish, and Tofte fails to render claim 3 unpatentable,” (from remarks page 10).
As to point (D), see points (A) and (B).
(E) Applicant argues, “Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over Boriss in view of Aldarwish, and Tofte, and further in view of Freiheit (US 11,449,078). Claim 4 depends from claim 1. The features of claim 1 missing from the combination of Boriss, Aldarwish, and Tofte are also missing from Freiheit. Therefore, the combination of Boriss, Aldarwish, Tofte, and Freiheit fails to render claim 4 unpatentable,” (from remarks page 10).
As to point (E), see points (A) and (B).
(F) Applicant argues, “Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over Boriss in view of Aldarwish, and further in view of Eluganti. Claim 5 depends from claim 1. Eluganti fails to disclose or suggest the features of claim 1 missing from the combination of Boriss and Aldarwish, and as a result, the combination of Boriss, Aldarwish, and Eluganti fails to render claim 5 unpatentable,” (from remarks page 10).
As to point (F), see points (A) and (B).
(G) Applicant argues, “Claim 8 depends from claim 1. The features of claim 1 missing from the combination of Boriss, Aldarwish, and Eluganti are also missing from Danesh. Therefore, the combination of Boriss, Aldarwish, Eluganti, and Danesh fails to render claim 8 unpatentable,” (from remarks page 11).
As to point (G), see points (A) and (B).
(H) Applicant argues, “The combination of Aldarwish, Boriss, and Eluganti fails to disclose or suggest these features for the reasons argued above. Wang, Bruner, Ayasli, and Everett are all silent with respect to these features. As a result, the combination of Aldarwish, Boriss, Eluganti, Wang, Bruner, Ayasli, and Everett fails to disclose or suggest all the features of claim 10 and fails to render claim 1 unpatentable. Claims 14 and 15 are patentable because of their dependencies and for the subject matter they recite,” (from remarks page 11).
As to point (H), see points (A) and (B).
(I) Applicant argues, “Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over Aldarwish in view of Boriss, Wang, Bruner, Ayasli, Everett, Eluganti, and Danesh. Claim 11 depends from claim 10. Eluganti and Danesh fail to disclose or suggest the features of claim 10 missing from the combination of Aldarwish, Boriss, Wang, Bruner, Ayasli, and Everett, and therefore, the combination of Aldarwish, Boriss, Wang, Bruner, Ayasli, Everett, Eluganti, and Danesh fails to render claim 11 unpatentable,” (from remarks page 12).
As to point (I), see points (A) and (B).
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the amended claim ends with a comma instead of a period.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: in lines 20-21, which read “allocating and operating the unmanned aerial vehicles, comprising:…”, the comprising reads as enumerating a list of steps involved in allocating and operating. However, the list in the following lines enumerates components of unmanned aerial vehicles, indicating that “comprising” was intended to tie back to the unmanned aerial vehicles. Examiner suggests changing this line to “…the unmanned aerial vehicles comprising:…”..
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-6, 8, 10-11 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 1 and 10, the amended claims contain the phrase “an MLS optical navigation system”. Because an MLS system transmits in the microwave region (see instant specification [0009]), it is unclear how an optical navigation system, operating the in the visible light region, can be considered an MLS optical navigation system. The meaning of the additional limitation added by specifying an MLS optical navigation system is therefore indefinite. For the purposes of examination, the “MLS optical navigation system” will be understood as “an optical navigation system used in conjunction with the MLS navigation system equipment”.
Further regarding claim 10, the claim recites the limitation “the unmanned aerial vehicles related to land topography or relief” on page 6, line 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Unmanned aerial vehicles are introduced on page 6, line 9, as “a swarm of unmanned aerial vehicles acquiring data allowing for the generation of up-to-date radio wave propagation models.” It is unclear whether the unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) acquiring data for radio wave models are the same or different from the UAVs related to land topography or relief. Furthermore, the UAVs of line 9 cannot serve as antecedent basis for the UAVs of line 13, because both limitations are part of a list of which only one element is required (see page 6, line 8; “realised by means of one or more of”).
Similarly, unmanned aerial vehicles are again recited in line 15, and these UAVs again lack antecedent basis. It is not clear whether the UAVs of line 15 are the same as those of line 9, line 13, or neither. Furthermore, it is not understood why any previously-introduced UAVs would have optimal spatial positions based on a criterion of minimising interference, including transmitter carriers.
Similarly, unmanned aerial vehicles are again recited in line 20, and these UAVs again lack antecedent basis. It is not clear whether the UAVs of line 20 are the same as those of line 9, line 13, line 15 or none of the above.
For purposes of examination, “each of the unmanned aerial vehicles related to land topography or relief” of lines 12-13 will be read as “one or more unmanned aerial vehicles related to land topography or relief”. For purposes of examination, “the unmanned aerial vehicles” of line 15 will be read as the “MLS system components.” For purposes of examination, “the unmanned aerial vehicles” of line 20 will be read as different from those of lines 9 and 13.
Claims 2-6, 8, 11 and 14-15 are also rejected since the claims are dependent on a previously rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aldarwish (US-20200033892-A1; hereinafter Aldarwish) in view of Boriss (US-4021806-A; hereinafter Boriss) and Eluganti et al. (WO-2017083430-A1; hereinafter, Eluganti).
Regarding claim 1, Aldarwish discloses [Note: what Aldarwish fails to disclose is strike-through]:
A (see at least Abs; “The method may include a landing assistance system with at least one autonomous aircraft configured to provide the aircraft with information regarding a desired position relative to a runway”), the
an (see at least [0056]; “Many modern airports have implemented Instrument Landing Systems (ILS) that provide radio waves to approaching aircraft …The horizontal guidance is referred to as localizer (LOC)…”) integrated on at least one unmanned aerial vehicle (see at least [0064]; "In some embodiments, interceptor drones may be provided in lieu of an ILS system. For example, some airports and/or runways are not equipped with an ILS system (e.g., the runway does not produce ILS signals). The interceptor drones may provide information to the approaching aircraft that is similar to the information that would be provided by an ILS system.") and configured to indicate an approach azimuth of a guided object (see at least [0056]; "Many modern airports have implemented Instrument Landing Systems (ILS) that provide radio waves to approaching aircraft that can be intercepted by a companion ILS system on the approaching aircraft to provide the pilot with both a vertical and a horizontal guidance during the landing approach…);
an (see at least [0056]; “Many modern airports have implemented Instrument Landing Systems (ILS) that provide radio waves to approaching aircraft … the vertical guidance is referred to as glideslope (GS).”) integrated on the at least one unmanned aerial vehicle (see at least [0064]; "In some embodiments, interceptor drones may be provided in lieu of an ILS system. For example, some airports and/or runways are not equipped with an ILS system (e.g., the runway does not produce ILS signals). The interceptor drones may provide information to the approaching aircraft that is similar to the information that would be provided by an ILS system.") and configured to indicate an altitude (see at least [0056]; "Many modern airports have implemented Instrument Landing Systems (ILS) that provide radio waves to approaching aircraft that can be intercepted by a companion ILS system on the approaching aircraft to provide the pilot with both a vertical and a horizontal guidance during the landing approach…);
However, Aldarwish does not teach a microwave landing system, or the azimuth and elevation transmitters implemented in an MLS system, or the elevation transmitter providing an absolute indication of current altitude. Aldarwish furthermore does not teach:
an MLS distance measuring equipment (DME) transmitter integrated on the at least one unmanned aerial vehicle and configured to measure a physical distance between the guided object and the DME transmitter;
an optical navigation system used in conjunction with the MLS navigation system equipment and integrated on the at least one unmanned aerial vehicle and configured to utilise a database comprising coordinates of reference objects.
Aldarwish is directed to assisting an aircraft in various functions using autonomous aircraft, and Boriss discloses approach profiles for a microwave landing system. Boriss teaches:
an MLS (see at least Abs, "A microwave landing system wherein a plurality of curved path approach profiles are defined tangent to the localizer beam center line.") azimuth antenna transmitter configured to indicate an approach azimuth of a guided object (see at least col. 2, lines 52-60; "In a typical system, a shaft encoder on the antenna of the localizer transmitter continuously yields a digital signal which is indicative of the instantaneous azimuth of the localizer beam. This digital signal is then modulated onto the localizer beam; thus, as aircraft 22 flies into the localizer beam an onboard receiver can immediately determine how far to the left or right of the localizer center line the aircraft's instantaneous position is.");
an MLS (see at least Abs, "A microwave landing system wherein a plurality of curved path approach profiles are defined tangent to the localizer beam center line.") elevation antenna transmitter configured to indicate an altitude at which the guided object is situated (see at least col. 2, lines 60-65;"A similar encoder on the glideslope antenna produces a signal which is indicative of the instantaneous elevation of the glideslope beam; thus, as the aircraft flies into this beam, an onboard glideslope receiver can immediately determine the elevation of the aircraft at the instant it crosses the beam.");
an MLS (see at least Abs, "A microwave landing system wherein a plurality of curved path approach profiles are defined tangent to the localizer beam center line.") distance measuring equipment (DME) configured to measure a physical distance between the guided object and the DME transmitter (see at least col. 2, lines 39-43; "The antenna which is connected to the Distance Measuring Equipment (DME) transmitter radiates a signal which enables a computer on the aircraft 22 to compute how far it is to the landing site").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the drone-assisted landing system used in Aldarwish to replace the ILS transmitters for MLS transmitters, including the DME, as taught by Boriss. Such a modification would have a reasonable expectation of success because both systems employ antennas transmitting guidance signals, including azimuth and elevation antennas. One of ordinary skill would be motivate to equip the drone system of Aldarwish with an ILS system in order to better guide aircraft in challenging environments, as taught by Boriss (see Boriss at least col. 1, lines 19-27; “The difficulties of safely landing aircraft have been widely reported. When the environment is hostile, for example, in a tactical military situation, or where traffic congestion exists or the weather is marginal, the pressure on the pilot and on the traffic controller often leads to dangerous situations, if not to fatal accidents. As a solution to these problems, a new generation of landing systems has been developed. Known generically as Microwave Landing Systems (MLS)…”).
However, neither Aldarwich nor Boriss teach:
an optical navigation system used in conjunction with the MLS navigation system equipment and integrated on the at least one unmanned aerial vehicle and configured to utilise a database comprising coordinates of reference objects.
Eluganti teaches an optical navigation system integrated on the at least one unmanned aerial vehicle and configured to utilise a database comprising the coordinates of reference objects (see at least [0026], where the database is accessed through GPS communications; "In accordance with further example embodiment, the unmanned aircraft 102 may fly the complete navigational aid system approach procedure to the runway 104. This approach procedure may maneuver the unmanned aircraft 102 just above the runway so that both ends of the runway may be visually marked by sensors on the unmanned aircraft 102. The visual markings may be way-points of a GBAS at the airport that the unmanned aircraft 102 is able to develop and/or validate using the positioning information 116 received from the GPS satellite.").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the landing system of Aladarwish and the MLS system of Boriss to include the optical navigation system as taught by Eluganti. One of ordinary skill would be motivated to include an optical navigation system in order to validate the position of visual markings related to the runway, as recognized by Eluganti (see Eluganti at least [0026]).
Regarding claim 2, Aldarwish in view of Boriss and Eluganti discloses the system according to claim 1. Aldarwish further teaches:
wherein the at least one unmanned aerial vehicle comprises a plurality of unmanned aerial vehicles, wherein each of said azimuth antenna (see at least [0056]), elevation antenna (see at least [0056]), (see at least [0053]; “FIG. 8 illustrates an embodiment of a drone control system 800. In some embodiments, the plurality of autonomous aircraft may include a master autonomous aircraft 802 and at least one slave autonomous aircraft 804. The master autonomous aircraft 802 may calculate an optimal position for each of the plurality of autonomous aircraft. The master autonomous aircraft 802 may then transmit the positioning information to the at least one slave autonomous aircraft 804. In some embodiments, each of the plurality of autonomous aircraft may include an antenna apparatus 806 (e.g., receiver, transmitter, etc.) configured to receive and/or transmit telemetry information, positioning information, atmospheric conditions, weather conditions, adjustments, etc.”).
However, Aldarwish does not teach the use of DME transmitters.
Boriss teaches DME transmitters (see at least col. 2, lines 39-43; "The antenna which is connected to the Distance Measuring Equipment (DME) transmitter radiates a signal which enables a computer on the aircraft 22 to compute how far it is to the landing site").
It would have been obvious to combine Aldarwish and Boriss for the reasons given regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 5, Aldarwish in view of Boriss and Eluganti discloses the system according to claim 1. Eluganti further teaches:
wherein the system comprises a calibration unmanned aerial vehicle configured to verify the correct operation of the system (see at least [0010]; "Aspects of the present invention relate to methods, systems, and computer- readable media for performing a flight check of one or more navigational aid systems. Aspects include determining, using an unmanned aircraft, an accuracy of signals transmitted by a localizer. Aspects also include determining, using the unmanned aircraft, an accuracy of signals transmitted by a glide slope station.". See also [0028]; “The process described in this flow diagram may be implemented and/or performed by an unmanned aircraft, such as the unmanned aircraft 102 illustrated in FIG. 1. For example, the unmanned aircraft 102 may include a drone, an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), and/or a battery operated quadcopter. In an aspect, the unmanned aircraft 102 may be able self-flying meaning that the flight check may be performed without or with minimal human interaction.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the drone-based navigational aid system used in Aldarwish to include drones for verifying the navigational aid calibration, as taught by Eluganti. One of ordinary skill would be motivated to include drones in the verification process in order to reduce the required labor, as recognized by Eluganti (see Eluganti at least [0008] - [0009]; “Currently, for example, there are various flight maneuvers that must be performed by a flight inspection crew as part of a flight inspection of the various navigation aid systems. Each navigation aid system is inspected several times a year, and requires an aircraft fleet that is expensive to maintain, an inspection crew to fly and maintain the aircrafts, ten or more hours of flight time to accomplish, and appropriate weather to perform the flight maneuvers (e.g., not too windy and with good visibility). Therefore, there exists an unmet need in the art for methods, apparatuses, and computer-readable media to perform the flight maneuvers required to inspect navigational aid systems using an unmanned drone that reduce the expense of maintaining a fleet of aircraft, commissioning a crew, and which allow the maneuvers to be performed under less than ideal weather conditions.”).
Regarding claim 6, Aldarwish in view of Boriss and Eluganti discloses the system according to claim 1. Aldarwish further teaches:
wherein the unmanned aerial vehicles are configured to be controlled by an operator or operate autonomously (see at least [0064]; " In some embodiments, interceptor drones may be provided in lieu of an ILS system. For example, some airports and/or runways are not equipped with an ILS system (e.g., the runway does not produce ILS signals). The interceptor drones may provide information to the approaching aircraft that is similar to the information that would be provided by an ILS system. Alternatively the interceptor drones may be programmed with the exact approach necessary such that the interceptor drones may lead the approaching aircraft down the correct path, through any of the above mentioned methods, as if following an ILS signal, where no ILS signal is available. In some embodiments, the companion autonomous aircraft 204 may provide similar functionality to an interceptor drone through programming or uploaded information.").
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aldarwish in view of Boriss and Eluganti, further in view of Tofte et al. (US-10102589-B1; hereinafter, Tofte).
Regarding claim 3, Aldarwish in view of Boriss and Eluganti discloses the system according to claim 1. However, Aldarwish does not teach wherein said at least one unmanned aerial vehicle is powered from the ground by means of a cable.
Aldarwish teaches drones that produce signals similar to an instrument landing system, and Tofte is directed to unmanned aerial vehicles that gather information for insurance-related tasks. Tofte teaches wherein said at least one unmanned aerial vehicle is powered from the ground by means of a cable (see at least col. 38, lines 60-67; "In some aspects, the various UAV functions may be performed by UAVs maneuvering with or without a tethered system. For example, in some aspects, one or more UAVs may fly untethered to carryout various functions. In other aspects, however, one or more UAVs may utilize a tethering system while flying (or other means of locomotion) within a radius governed by the length of the tether. Such tethering systems may be particularly useful, for example, when higher power requirements are required, such that one or more UAVs may receive power via the tether instead of draining their respective internal batteries.").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the drone-based landing assistance system of Boriss in view of Aldarwish to include a cable to power the drones, as taught by Tofte. Such a modification would have a reasonable expectation of success, as Tofte shows the feasibility of using a tether to power drones. One of ordinary skill would be motivated to include a powered cable or tether in order to provide power without draining the drone batteries, as recognized by Tofte (see Tofte at least col. 38, lines 60-67).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boriss in view of Aldarwish and Tofte, further in view of Freiheit (US-11449078-B1; hereinafter, Freiheit).
Regarding claim 4, Aldarwish in view of Boriss and Eluganti discloses the system according to claim 1. Aldarwish further teaches:
wherein the at least one unmanned aerial vehicle is provided with a laser light emitter (see at least [0028]; "In some embodiments, the autonomous aircraft 204 and the aircraft 100 may utilize LIDAR systems (e.g., LiDAR, LADAR) to maintain the relative displacement. LIDAR systems utilize a pulsed laser and a sensor on one or both aircraft and measures a distance between the two by measuring the time required for the laser pulse to return to the originating aircraft.") and anticollision system (see at least [0067]; "In some embodiments, the system may include a proximity sensing device 1002 such as, a proximity sensor (e.g., magnetic sensor, IR sensor, etc.) or a threshold distance as measured by a LIDAR system such that the battery crush is triggered when the threshold distance is met.").
However Aldarwish does not disclose wherein the at least one unmanned aerial vehicle is provided with a camera, microphone and Doppler laser.
Tofte teaches wherein the at least one unmanned aerial vehicle is provided with a camera and microphone (see at least col. 8, lines 51-65; "Examples of suitable sensor types implemented by sensor array and/or instrument bay 204 may include one or more accelerometers, gyroscopes, compasses, speedometers, magnetometers, barometers, thermometers, proximity sensors, light sensors (e.g., light intensity detectors), Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) sensors, sonar sensors, electromagnetic radiation sensors (e.g., infrared and/or ultraviolet radiation sensors), ultrasonic and/or infrared range detectors, thermistors, humistors, hygrometers, altimeters, microphones, camera, video or audio recorders, etc. Sensor array and/or instrument bay 204 may additionally or alternatively include advanced sensors, for example, that detect and/or receive data associated with temperature measurements, thermal imaging, multispectral imaging, weather conditions, traffic conditions, etc.").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the drone-based landing assistance system of Aldarwish to include a microphone and camera on the drones, as taught by Tofte. Such a modification would have a reasonable expectation of success, as Tofte shows the feasibility of mounting these sensors on drones. One of ordinary skill would be motivated to include a microphone and camera in order to collect information about the environment around the drone, as recognized by Tofte (see Tofte at least col. 8, lines 38-40).
However, neither Aldarwish nor Tofte disclose wherein the unmanned aerial vehicles which the system consists of are provided with Doppler lasers.
Aldarwish teaches drones that produce signals similar to an instrument landing system, and Freiheit is directed to an electric aircraft such as a drone with flight trajectory planning. Freiheit teaches wherein the unmanned aerial vehicles which the system consists of are provided with Doppler lasers (see at least col. 6, lines 64-67; "Sensor 200 may include an anemometer. The anemometer may be configured to detect a wind speed. In some embodiments, the anemometer may include a hot wire, laser doppler, ultrasonic, and/or pressure anemometer.").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the drone-based landing assistance system of Aldarwish to include a laser doppler on the drones, as taught by Tofte. Such a modification would have a reasonable expectation of success, as Freiheit shows the feasibility of mounting these sensors on drones. One of ordinary skill would be motivated to include a laser doppler anemometer in order to collect information about the weather in the area around the drone, as recognized by Freiheit (see Freiheit at least Abs, “The electric aircraft includes a sensor. The sensor is coupled to the electric aircraft. The sensor is configured to detect a plurality of weather measurements.”).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aldarwish in view of Boriss and Eluganti, further in view of Danesh et al. (M. R. Danesh and F. D. Powell, “Mobile Microwave Landing System (MMLS): Operational Requirements for Setup Accuracy,” prepared by the MITRE Corporation for the United States Air Force, Aug. 1991; hereinafter, Danesh).
Regarding claim 8, Aldarwish in view of Boriss and Eluganti discloses the system according to claim 1. Eluganti further teaches:
further comprising an automatic (see at least [0028]; “In an aspect, the unmanned aircraft 102 may be able self-flying meaning that the flight check may be performed without or with minimal human interaction”) calibrating system (see at least [0024] for a description of validating the guidance signals of the localizer, [0025] for validating the glide scope, and [0027]; “In this way, the unmanned aircraft 102 of the present disclosure is able to test localizer signals, glide slope signals, and VOR coverage, which would otherwise not be possible using ordinary ground check equipment and procedures”) configured to ensure proper operation of the system (see at least Abs; “Aspects include determining, using an unmanned aircraft, an accuracy of signals transmitted by a localizer. Aspects also include determining, using the unmanned aircraft, an accuracy of signals transmitted by a glide slope station.”) .
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the drone-based navigational aid of Aldarwish to include automatic verification of the navigational aid calibration using self-flying aircraft as taught by Eluganti. Such a modification would have a reasonable expectation of success as the system of Eluganti is designed to work with a wide variety of navigational aids (see Eluganti at least [0021]). One of ordinary skill would be motivated to include automation in verifying the calibration in order to avoid the time and cost of conventional methods, as recognized by Eluganti (see Eluganti at least [0022]; “Currently, there are various flight maneuvers that must be performed by a flight inspection crew as part of a flight inspection of the various navigation aid systems. Each navigation aid system is inspected several times a year, and requires an aircraft fleet that is expensive to maintain, an inspection crew to fly and maintain the aircrafts, ten or more hours of flight time to accomplish, and appropriate weather to perform the flight maneuvers (e.g., not too windy and with good visibility). In order to ensure the accuracy of navigation aid systems while reducing the cost and time of performing flight checks of the various navigation aid systems, the present disclosure provides an unmanned drone that is relatively inexpensive to maintain and which is able to check the accuracy of navigation aid systems using various location information in a surveyed field. For example, the location information may be received from a global positioning system (GPS), a position monitoring station located at a surveyed point at the airport, or any other position location reporting system.”).
However, neither Aldarwish nor Eluganti teach wherein it additionally comprises an automatic calibrating system, configured to ensure proper operation of the system under various land relief conditions.
Aldarwish teaches drones that produce signals similar to an instrument landing system, and Danesh is directed to the required accuracy of the survey and angular alignment when deploying a mobile microwave landing system. Danesh teaches configured to ensure proper operation of the system under various land relief conditions (see at least the Executive Summary, page vii, where the survey requirements are determined to allow a successful set up of the system in four different deployment scenarios, including conventional and short-field arrangements of the ground units: “The operational uses of the Mobile Microwave Landing System (MMLS) are as a temporary replacement for a permanent installation which is out of service, or in tactical applications in the field. In either application, and especially in tactical use where a pre-surveyed site cannot be assumed, the ability to set up the system quickly is critical. The speed of the procedure, the time within which the setup can be completed, depends on a variety of elements; this report concentrates on one aspect - the accuracy required of the survey and angular alignment. This report examines the accuracy required for the survey and alignment, collectively the setup, in four deployment scenarios. These four deployment scenarios are: 1. The ground units are collocated at the conventional location for the elevation antenna, about 800 to 1000' towards the stop-end of the runway, and 150 off the centerline. Category I (Cat I) operation is required; 2. The ground units are collocated about 200' upwind from the threshold, and 150' offset, a short-field arrangement, and Cat I operation is required; 3. The azimuth antenna is located on the runway centerline extension at the stopend of a 12,000' runway, the elevation antenna is sited as in Case 1 except 450' offset from the centerline, and Cat I operation is required. 4. The ground units are sited as in Case 3, and Cat II operation is required. For each case, the random errors inherent in the equipment are combined, RSS, and this random value is subtracted from the allowable system errors for the two categories of operation. The difference, or margin, is assigned the budgets of the various survey and alignment elements.").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the automated calibration system above, of Aldarwish in light of Eluganti, to adhere to the allowable tolerances for the placement of the transmitters in various geometries taught by Danesh. Maintaining the allowable tolerances for the transmitter placement in various deployment geometries would enable the proper operation of the system under various land relief conditions, with the conventional deployments and short-field arrangements selected as necessitated by the land relief conditions. In working to calibrate the landing assistance system, one of ordinary skill would be motivated to follow the tolerances in placement of the transmitters in order to achieve proper functioning of the system, as recognized by Danesh (see Danesh at least Executive Summary).
Claims 10 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aldarwish in view of Boriss, Eluganti, Wang et al. (US-20150170526-A1; hereinafter Wang), and Everett et al. (S. Everett, K. Markin, P. Wroblewski and M. Zeltser, "Design considerations for achieving MLS Category III requirements," in Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 77, no. 11, pp. 1752-1761, Nov. 1989; hereinafter Everett).
Regarding claim 10, Aldarwish discloses a method for realising a precise landing approach of a guided object (see at least Abs; “The method may include a landing assistance system with at least one autonomous aircraft configured to provide the aircraft with information regarding a desired position relative to a runway”), comprising:
allocating and operating the unmanned aerial vehicles (see at least [0064]; “In some embodiments, interceptor drones may be provided in lieu of an ILS system”), comprising:
an (see at least [0056]; “Many modern airports have implemented Instrument Landing Systems (ILS) that provide radio waves to approaching aircraft …The horizontal guidance is referred to as localizer (LOC)…”) integrated on each unmanned aerial vehicle (see at least [0064]; "In some embodiments, interceptor drones may be provided in lieu of an ILS system. For example, some airports and/or runways are not equipped with an ILS system (e.g., the runway does not produce ILS signals). The interceptor drones may provide information to the approaching aircraft that is similar to the information that would be provided by an ILS system.") and configured to indicate the approach azimuth of the guided object (see at least [0056]; "Many modern airports have implemented Instrument Landing Systems (ILS) that provide radio waves to approaching aircraft that can be intercepted by a companion ILS system on the approaching aircraft to provide the pilot with both a vertical and a horizontal guidance during the landing approach…);
an (see at least [0056]; “Many modern airports have implemented Instrument Landing Systems (ILS) that provide radio waves to approaching aircraft … the vertical guidance is referred to as glideslope (GS).”) integrated on each unmanned aerial vehicle (see at least [0064]; "In some embodiments, interceptor drones may be provided in lieu of an ILS system. For example, some airports and/or runways are not equipped with an ILS system (e.g., the runway does not produce ILS signals). The interceptor drones may provide information to the approaching aircraft that is similar to the information that would be provided by an ILS system.") and configured to indicate the altitude (see at least [0056]; "Many modern airports have implemented Instrument Landing Systems (ILS) that provide radio waves to approaching aircraft that can be intercepted by a companion ILS system on the approaching aircraft to provide the pilot with both a vertical and a horizontal guidance during the landing approach…);
However, Aldarwish does not teach a microwave landing system, or the azimuth and elevation transmitters implemented in an MLS system, or the elevation transmitter providing an absolute indication of current altitude. Aldarwish furthermore does not explicitly teach:
establishing an area of operation of a microwave landing system (MLS) system realizing the precise landing approach:
by inputting data; or
automatically based on an analysis of topographic data and data related to a state of the atmosphere, for providing safety of the precise landing approach;
defining a required flight trajectory of the guided object for a classic landing approach at a certified airport, or adjusted ambient conditions and/or a technical condition of the guided object, optimised in terms of safety of the precise landing approach;
acquiring spatial data influencing the precision and a reliability of the precise landing approach, and data related to land relief and topography, where the acquisition of the spatial data and data related to land relief and topography is realized by means of one or more of:
a swarm of unmanned aerial vehicles acquiring data allowing for the generation of up-to-date radio wave propagation models;
3-D models of the surroundings; or
data based on an analysis of an image of the surroundings from each of the unmanned aerial vehicles related to land topography or relief;
identifying optimal spatial positions of the MLS system components based on a criterion of minimizing interference, including transmitter carriers;
defining an optimal specification of the MLS, including directions of transmitters, signal cut-off parameters, and an angular range of emitted signals;
unmanned aerial vehicles comprising:
a distance measuring equipment (DME) transmitter integrated on each unmanned aerial vehicle and configured to measure the physical distance between the guided object and the transmitter; and
an optical navigation system used in conjunction with the MLS navigation system equipment, integrated on each unmanned aerial vehicle and configured to utilise a database comprising coordinates of reference objects.
Aldarwish discloses assisting an aircraft in various functions, including landing, using autonomous aircraft or drones, and Wang is directed to a method for finding a suitable landing area for an aircraft. Wang teaches establishing an area of operation of a landing system realising the precise landing approach (see at least [0001]; “The subject matter disclosed herein relates generally to the field of unmanned aerial vehicles and, more particularly, to a semantics based safe landing area detection algorithm for determining a safe landing area for an unmanned aerial vehicle") by inputting data or automatically based on an analysis of topographic data (see at least [0003]; "According to an aspect of the invention, a method for determining a suitable landing area for an aircraft includes receiving signals indicative of terrain information for a terrain via a 3D perception system; receiving signals indicative of image information for the terrain via a camera perception system; evaluating, with the processor, the terrain information and generating information indicative of a landing zone candidate region; co-registering in a coordinate system, with the processor, the landing zone candidate region and the image information; segmenting, with the processor, an image region corresponding to the landing zone candidate region to generate segmented regions, the landing zone candidate region being related to the co-registered image and the landing zone candidate region; classifying, with the processor, the segmented regions into semantic classes; determining, with the processor, contextual information in the semantic classes; and ranking and prioritizing the contextual information.") and data related to a state of the atmosphere (see at least [0014] "The system 200 may include a database 212. The database 212 may be used to store inertial navigational data that may be acquired by IMU including operating conditions of the autonomous UAV 100 (FIG. 1) such as, for example, lateral acceleration, attitude, and angular rate, magnitude and direction of wind speed relative to autonomous UAV 100."), for providing safety of the precise landing approach (see at least [0010] "Further, the semantic classes are prioritized and ranked to determine a safe landing area");
acquiring spatial data influencing the precision and a reliability of the precise landing approach, and data related to land relief and topography (see at least [0003]; "According to an aspect of the invention, a method for determining a suitable landing area for an aircraft includes receiving signals indicative of terrain information for a terrain via a 3D perception system; receiving signals indicative of image information for the terrain via a camera perception system..."), where the acquisition of the spatial data is realised by means of one or more of:
a swarm of unmanned aerial vehicles acquiring data allowing for the generation of up-to-date radio wave propagation models;
3-D models of the surroundings (see at least [0018], where a 3D model of the surroundings is created from measured data and used to simulate a drone landing: “[0018] In an embodiment, the 3D point cloud data may be further processed in landing zone candidate module 312 through a triangulation algorithm having a 3D model of the autonomous UAV 100 for the landing zone candidates. For example, a 3D model of the autonomous UAV 100 may be used in a 2D Delaunay triangulation algorithm in order to determine the "goodness" of a particular landing zone previously identified through the LIDAR processing module 310. For example, the Delaunay triangulation algorithm may be used to calculate a volume between an undersurface of the 3D model for the autonomous UAV 100 with respect to data points in the image. The 2D Delaunay triangulation as applied to a sampling of points from the undercarriage may be used in order to determine whether the 3D model will result in bad contact of the autonomous UAV 100 in particular landing zone as represented by the image.”); or
data based on an analysis of an image of the surroundings from one or more unmanned aerial vehicles related to land topography or relief (see at least [0012]; "The autonomous UAV 100 includes an aircraft computer 118 having one or more processors and memory to process sensor data acquired from the perception system 106. Also, the perception system 106 is attached to the airframe 108. Perception system 106 includes sensors associated with one or more remote image acquisition devices for capturing data from a terrain and for processing by the flight computer 118 while the autonomous UAV 100 is airborne. In an embodiment, the perception system 106 may include a multi-modal perception system such as a downward-scanning LIDAR scanner, a color video camera, a multi-spectral camera, a stereo camera system, Structure light based 3D/depth sensor, Time-of-flight 3D camera, RADAR, and/or a Time-of-Flight (TOF) camera or the like in order to capture terrain data for implementing the semantics based SLAD algorithm."),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the drone-assisted landing system used in Aldarwish to include analysis of land topography for suitability of aircraft landing, as taught by Wang. Such a modification would have a reasonable expectation of success, as the data used in Wang to assess terrain is gathered and analyzed on board UAVs, and Aldarwish already teaches the use of UAVs in a landing aid system. One of ordinary skill would be motivated to include a UAV-based analysis of terrain in order to identify suitable aircraft landing sites, as recognized by Wang (see Wang at least [0003]).
However, neither Aldarwish nor Wang explicitly teach a microwave landing system, or the azimuth and elevation transmitters implemented in an MLS system, or the elevation transmitter providing an absolute indication of current altitude. These references furthermore does not teach:
defining a required flight trajectory of the guided object for a classic landing approach at a certified airport, or adjusted ambient conditions and/or a technical condition of the guided object, optimised in terms of safety of the precise landing approach;
identifying optimal spatial positions of the MLS system components based on a criterion of minimizing interference, including transmitter carriers;
defining an optimal specification of the MLS, including directions of transmitters, signal cut-off parameters, and an angular range of emitted signals;
unmanned aerial vehicles comprising:
a distance measuring equipment (DME) transmitter integrated on each unmanned aerial vehicle and configured to measure the physical distance between the guided object and the transmitter; and
an optical navigation system used in conjunction with the MLS navigation system equipment, integrated on each unmanned aerial vehicle and configured to utilise a database comprising coordinates of reference objects.
Boriss teaches defining a required flight trajectory of the guided object (see at least col. 1, lines 53-65; “The above problems have been solved by the instant invention which, in a preferred embodiment, comprises a method of guiding an aircraft towards a landing site. The method comprises the steps of transmitting into a region of space a plurality of radio beams which permits said aircraft to determine its azimuth, elevation and range to the landing site, defining in the region of space at least one curved path approach profile, the profile being tangent to the desired approach path for the landing site, transmitting to the aircraft the coordinates of the profile, and then generating in said aircraft signals for the aircraft such that the aircraft is directed along the profile and into the desired approach path.") for a classic landing approach at a certified airport, or adjusted to ambient conditions (see at least col. 3, lines 5-12, where ambient conditions is interpreted to include the density of aircraft desiring to land; "Now, merely knowing where one is with respect to the landing zone is not sufficient to guarantee safe guidance because theoretically there are a very large number of possible paths between the aircraft and the final approach path. Thus, there is nothing to prevent two pilots, or a harried air controller, from selecting intersecting paths to the final approach path, with potentially disastrous results.") and/or a technical condition of the guided object (see at least col. 3, lines 31-37, where the technical requirements for aircraft to be compatible with the landing system are given: “FIG. 3 depicts the circuitry required on the aircraft to implement this procedure. As shown, a glideslope receiver 41, a DME receiver 42 and a localizer receiver 43 are connected to an antenna 44 and these receivers respectively receive and decode the glideslope, distance and localizer signals which are transmitted from the ground.”), optimised in terms of safety of the precise landing approach (see at least col. 4, lines 23-25 and 33-37; "The above-described technique for performing curved-path approaches is applicable to both military and civil operations. It provides the following features: … 2. High density aircraft operations can be accommodated. That is, a large number of aircraft can be properly spaced and funnelled into the landing system, thereby providing improved operations in terms of safety and efficiency.");
an MLS (see at least Abs, "A microwave landing system wherein a plurality of curved path approach profiles are defined tangent to the localizer beam center line.") azimuth antenna transmitter configured to indicate an approach azimuth of a guided object (see at least col. 2, lines 52-60; "In a typical system, a shaft encoder on the antenna of the localizer transmitter continuously yields a digital signal which is indicative of the instantaneous azimuth of the localizer beam. This digital signal is then modulated onto the localizer beam; thus, as aircraft 22 flies into the localizer beam an onboard receiver can immediately determine how far to the left or right of the localizer center line the aircraft's instantaneous position is.");
an MLS (see at least Abs, "A microwave landing system wherein a plurality of curved path approach profiles are defined tangent to the localizer beam center line.") elevation antenna transmitter configured to indicate an altitude at which the guided object is situated (see at least col. 2, lines 60-65;"A similar encoder on the glideslope antenna produces a signal which is indicative of the instantaneous elevation of the glideslope beam; thus, as the aircraft flies into this beam, an onboard glideslope receiver can immediately determine the elevation of the aircraft at the instant it crosses the beam.");
an MLS (see at least Abs, "A microwave landing system wherein a plurality of curved path approach profiles are defined tangent to the localizer beam center line.") distance measuring equipment (DME) configured to measure a physical distance between the guided object and the DME transmitter (see at least col. 2, lines 39-43; "The antenna which is connected to the Distance Measuring Equipment (DME) transmitter radiates a signal which enables a computer on the aircraft 22 to compute how far it is to the landing site").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the drone-assisted landing system used in Aldarwish to follow the established approaches for defining a flight trajectory, optimized in terms of safety and with the use of a DME transmitter, as taught by Boriss. One of ordinary skill would be motivated to follow established methods for landing aid systems in order to guarantee the safety of the system.
However, neither Aldarwish, Wang, nor Boriss explicitly teach:
identifying the optimal spatial position of the MLS system components based on a criterion of minimising the interference, including transmitter carriers;
defining the optimal specification of the system, including the direction of transmitters, signal cut-off parameters, and the angular range of the emitted signal.
Aldarwish discloses using autonomous aircraft or drones to assist an aircraft in various functions, including landing, and Everett is directed to MLS ground equipment design considerations for achieving the requirements for Category III landing operations. Everett teaches:
identifying the optimal spatial positions of the MLS system components based on a criterion of minimising interference (see at least Page 1756, section C, par. 3; "However, because of the signal stability of MLS, the extensive use of digital processing techniques, the insensitivity of angle accuracy to signal amplitude, and siting of field monitors where they are free from interference, MLS should be subject to very few outages due to external causes."), including transmitter carriers (see at least Abs; "Achievement of high integrity is shown to be dependent on a monitoring system to detect and remove any out-of-tolerance transmissions in a timely fashion");
defining an optimal specification of the MLS (see at least page 1753, section C; "MLS accuracy is achieved by systems designs that satisfy the accuracy requirements with some margin. Table 2 illustrates a typical error budget for the azimuth and elevation functions. Only error sources that affect performance during the final stages of the landing are included."), including directions of transmitters (see at least Table 2 on page 1753, where antenna alignment and drift tolerances are given, and page 1754, col 1, lines 1-8: "This error budget reflects the typical MLS design using phased array antennas and digital technology; the use of 1° antenna beamwidths for azimuth and elevation with effective sidelobes that are at least 26 dB below the beam peak; and azimuth antennas with large vertical apertures. These budgets are practical to achieve and have been demonstrated with the MLS development and production equipment.), signal cut-off parameters (see at least the equations in col. 1 on page 1754, where the SNR and bandwidth of a 26-kHz low pass filter are used in the error budget calculations), and an angular range of emitted signals (see at least page 1754, section E, paragraph 2; "Errors caused by sidelobe reflections dθ2 are controlled by providing a sufficiently small antenna beamwidth and low effective sidelobes").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the drone-assisted landing system used in Aldarwish to follow established guidance for setting up a landing aid system with regards to: positioning components to avoid interference, setting the direction of the transmitters, defining the signal cut-off parameters, and setting the angular range of the signal, all of which figure in Everett’s models for MLS performance. One of ordinary skill would be motivated to follow established methods and tolerances when setting up a landing aid system in order to achieve the correct setup of the landing aid system (see Everett at least Abs).
Regarding claim 14, Aldarwish in view of Boriss, Eluganti, Wang and Everett discloses the method according to claim 10. Aldarwish further teaches comprising emitting light and direction signals supporting the guidance process of the guided object (see at least [0063]; "In some embodiments, airports or runways may have interceptor drones that intercept approaching aircraft and relay at least the ILS information to the approaching aircraft. In some embodiments, interceptor drones may line the approach and project the GS and LOC line(s) (e.g., guideline, path, recommended path, etc.) visually such that any approaching aircraft can follow the line and approach at the correct angle regardless of the visibility or the technology in the approaching aircraft.").
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aldarwish in view of Boriss, Wang, Bruner, Ayasli, Everett, Eluganti and Danesh.
Regarding claim 11, Aldarwish in view of Boriss, Eluganti, Wang and Everett discloses the method according to claim 10. Eluganti further teaches wherein it additionally comprises an automatic (see at least [0028]; “In an aspect, the unmanned aircraft 102 may be able self-flying meaning that the flight check may be performed without or with minimal human interaction”) calibrating system (see at least [0024] for a description of validating the guidance signals of the localizer, [0025] for validating the glide scope, and [0027]; “In this way, the unmanned aircraft 102 of the present disclosure is able to test localizer signals, glide slope signals, and VOR coverage, which would otherwise not be possible using ordinary ground check equipment and procedures”) configured to ensure proper operation of the system (see at least Abs; “Aspects include determining, using an unmanned aircraft, an accuracy of signals transmitted by a localizer. Aspects also include determining, using the unmanned aircraft, an accuracy of signals transmitted by a glide slope station.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the drone-based navigational aid used in Aldarwish to include automatic verification of the navigational aid calibration using self-flying aircraft as taught by Eluganti. Such a modification would have a reasonable expectation of success as the system of Eluganti is designed to work with a wide variety of navigational aids (see Eluganti at least [0021]). One of ordinary skill would be motivated to include automation in verifying the calibration in order to avoid the time and cost of conventional methods, as recognized by Eluganti (see Eluganti at least [0022]; “Currently, there are various flight maneuvers that must be performed by a flight inspection crew as part of a flight inspection of the various navigation aid systems. Each navigation aid system is inspected several times a year, and requires an aircraft fleet that is expensive to maintain, an inspection crew to fly and maintain the aircrafts, ten or more hours of flight time to accomplish, and appropriate weather to perform the flight maneuvers (e.g., not too windy and with good visibility). In order to ensure the accuracy of navigation aid systems while reducing the cost and time of performing flight checks of the various navigation aid systems, the present disclosure provides an unmanned drone that is relatively inexpensive to maintain and which is able to check the accuracy of navigation aid systems using various location information in a surveyed field. For example, the location information may be received from a global positioning system (GPS), a position monitoring station located at a surveyed point at the airport, or any other position location reporting system.”).
However, Eluganti does not teach wherein it additionally comprises an automatic calibrating system, configured to ensure proper operation of the system under various land relief conditions.
Danesh teaches configured to ensure proper operation of the system under various land relief conditions (see at least the Executive Summary, page vii, where the survey requirements are determined to allow a successful set up of the system in four different deployment scenarios, including conventional and short-field arrangements of the ground units: “The operational uses of the Mobile Microwave Landing System (MMLS) are as a temporary replacement for a permanent installation which is out of service, or in tactical applications in the field. In either application, and especially in tactical use where a pre-surveyed site cannot be assumed, the ability to set up the system quickly is critical. The speed of the procedure, the time within which the setup can be completed, depends on a variety of elements; this report concentrates on one aspect - the accuracy required of the survey and angular alignment. This report examines the accuracy required for the survey and alignment, collectively the setup, in four deployment scenarios. These four deployment scenarios are: 1. The ground units are collocated at the conventional location for the elevation antenna, about 800 to 1000' towards the stop-end of the runway, and 150 off the centerline. Category I (Cat I) operation is required; 2. The ground units are collocated about 200' upwind from the threshold, and 150' offset, a short-field arrangement, and Cat I operation is required; 3. The azimuth antenna is located on the runway centerline extension at the stopend of a 12,000' runway, the elevation antenna is sited as in Case 1 except 450' offset from the centerline, and Cat I operation is required. 4. The ground units are sited as in Case 3, and Cat II operation is required. For each case, the random errors inherent in the equipment are combined, RSS, and this random value is subtracted from the allowable system errors for the two categories of operation. The difference, or margin, is assigned the budgets of the various survey and alignment elements.").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the automated calibration system above, of Aldarwish in light of Eluganti, to adhere to the allowable tolerances for the placement of the transmitters in various geometries taught by Danesh. Maintaining the allowable tolerances for the transmitter placement in various deployment geometries would enable the proper operation of the system under various land relief conditions, with the conventional deployments and short-field arrangements selected as necessitated by the land relief conditions. In working to calibrate the landing assistance system, one of ordinary skill would be motivated to follow the tolerances in placement of the transmitters in order to achieve proper functioning of the system, as recognized by Danesh (see Danesh at least Executive Summary).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aldarwish in view of Boriss, Eluganti, Wang and Everett, further in view of Bruner (US-20190355145-A1; hereinafter, Bruner).
Regarding claim 15, Aldarwish in view of Boriss, Eluganti, Wang and Everett discloses the method according to claim 10.
However, Aldarwish does not teach comprising verifying operating parameters of the system and calibration based on the data acquired in a repetitive manner from a swarm of unmanned aerial vehicles.
Eluganti teaches comprising verifying operating parameters of the system and calibration (see at least [0010]; "Aspects of the present invention relate to methods, systems, and computer- readable media for performing a flight check of one or more navigational aid systems. Aspects include determining, using an unmanned aircraft, an accuracy of signals transmitted by a localizer. Aspects also include determining, using the unmanned aircraft, an accuracy of signals transmitted by a glide slope station.") based on the data acquired (see at least [0024] "In accordance with an example embodiment, the unmanned aircraft 102 may be able to test navigation aid systems (e.g., such as an ILS) by crossing 110 the ILS localizer course perpendicular to the normal direction of flight at a certain distance (e.g., 10 miles) from the airport. In an aspect, the unmanned drone 102 may be kept at a constant altitude (e.g., 2,000 ft) above the ground. During this check, the width of the transmitted localizer course (e.g., the two signals transmitted by the localizer) may be measured by the unmanned aircraft 102, and the unmanned aircraft 102 may check the accuracy of the two signals transmitted by the localizer 106. For example, the unmanned aircraft 102 may be able to determine the accuracy of the two signals transmitted by the localizer 106 based on positioning information 116 received from the the position monitoring station 114. Alternatively, since the unmanned aircraft 102 knows a starting position of the flight check, a speed of travel, and a direction of travel, the unmanned aircraft 102 may determine the accuracy of the two signals transmitted by the localizer 106 based on location information derived by the unmanned aircraft 102. This process may ensure that a pilot will always receive correct localizer guidance during landing procedure.").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the drone-based navigational aid used in Aldarwish to include verifying the operating parameters of the system and calibration, as Eluganti does using self-flying aircraft. Such a modification would have a reasonable expectation of success as the system of Eluganti is designed to work with a wide variety of navigational aids (see Eluganti at least [0021]). One of ordinary skill would be motivated to include verification of the operating parameters and calibration so that pilots will always receive the correct guidance during landing, as recognized by Eluganti (see Eluganti at least [0010]).
However, neither Aldarwish nor Eluganti teach data acquired in a repetitive manner from a swarm of unmanned aerial vehicles.
Aldarwish discloses using autonomous aircraft or drones to assist an aircraft in various functions, including landing, and Bruner is directed to deploying drones to collect sensor data and generate a map of the physical environment. Bruner teaches data acquired in a repetitive manner from a swarm of unmanned aerial vehicles (see at least [0062]; "When large numbers of swarm drones are deployed to scan a defined area, as in FIG. 14B, overlap and repeated scans of points by the multiple drones increase the confidence value associated with respective points. Localization redundancy and scan redundancy by the swarm drones and increased confidence for points facilitate the precise mapping and increased reliability of locations for the points in the physical environment.").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the drone-assisted landing system used in Aldarwish and the drone-based calibration validation system of Eluganti to use a swarm of drones for taking measurements, as taught by Bruner. The modification would involve using multiple drones to measure the guidance signals, rather than the single drone measurements taught by Eluganti. One of ordinary skill would be motivated to use a swarm of drones rather than a single drone in order to facilitate scanning the same location multiple times, thereby increasing the confidence of the measurements (see Bruner at least [0062]).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ashley B. Raynal whose telephone number is (703)756-4546. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8 AM - 4 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Vladimir Magloire can be reached at (571) 270-5144. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ASHLEY BROWN RAYNAL/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/VLADIMIR MAGLOIRE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648