Subject: [Drip] w/what part of an aircraft should its ID be associated?

From: "Card, Stu" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 12:29:07 -0400

This an attempt to kick off discussion on the list of a challenge we have
been discussing in various other groups. My text below was sent to some but
not all members of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)
Aviation Trust Framework Study Group (IATF/TFSG) in the context of
attempting to capture requirements for a harmonized digital identifier for
_all_ aircraft (and perhaps other entities in the aviation ecosystem).

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Stuart W. Card <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 12:52 PM
Subject: morphing ID? (was: Digital Identity use case)
...
Sounds like the serial number might be the _only_ part of the aircraft
that can never change? ;-)

Molecules of matter, design into which those molecules are structured,
resulting performance capabilities, all can evolve?

So, it becomes a tautology: the ID # identifies _itself_ statically, and
everything else dynamically?

==

This might sound pedantic or purely philosophical, but I am serious.

Over time, we are likely to replace _every component_ in one of our
small UAS at the test site where I work (whether due to wear, damage or
experimentation). If we replaced them all at once, everyone would agree
it is a different UA that should have a different serial number; but
because we replace them over time, incrementally, it remains the "same"
UA and retains the same serial number? I don't claim that is wrong, just
that it is curious, probably counter-intuitive and possibly not ideal.

As long as the changes do not significantly alter the characteristics
(major dimensions, mass, max climb rate, max air speed, maneuvering
capabilities, payload capacity, wireless communications range, etc.), I
see no problem with the aircraft retaining its identity and identifier;
but if the aircraft is radically altered, it becomes a different
aircraft, so perhaps should not retain its former ID.

... while making the ID # seemingly pointless,
"the ID # identifies _itself_ statically, and everything else dynamically"
might actually be the right answer, as registry lookups can return
all the information of interest (IMO especially current aircraft
characteristics,
current nation-state of registration, current registration number,
current registrant and current operator, albeit not necessarily all
in the same registry so recursive lookups likely would be needed)?
-----------------------------------------
Stuart W. Card, PhD, Principal Engineer
AX Enterprize, LLC  www.axenterprize.com
4947 Commercial Drive, Yorkville NY 13495

---

From: Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 15:01:10 -0400

Card, Stu <[email-masked]> wrote:
    > This an attempt to kick off discussion on the list of a challenge we
    > have been discussing in various other groups. My text below was sent to
    > some but not all members of the International Civil Aviation
    > Organization (ICAO) Aviation Trust Framework Study Group (IATF/TFSG) in
    > the context of attempting to capture requirements for a harmonized
    > digital identifier for _all_ aircraft (and perhaps other entities in
    > the aviation ecosystem).

understood.

...

    > .... while making the ID # seemingly pointless, "the ID # identifies
    > _itself_ statically, and everything else dynamically" might actually be
    > the right answer, as registry lookups can return all the information of
    > interest (IMO especially current aircraft characteristics, current

This makes complete sense to me.
This root of trust is represented by the ability to prove possesion of the
private key speaks for itself. "I (y)am wot/that I (y)am"
[Which is either a reference to Popeye, or Moses/Eloyhim
       https://genius.com/Robin-williams-i-yam-what-i-yam-lyrics
       https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Am_that_I_Am ]

Everything else is found in a directory or registry.
Implied to me is that everything in the registry should be signed by the root
of trust.  This is akin to Evidence in the RATS architecture.
These relatively long-lived items would be sent by reliable transport (not
BT5 broadcasts) through the GCS to the Internet prior to the Operation.
That is, the possibly many signatures required would be done at a time/place
where power was not a concern.

Any registration from a CAA or other external assertion of information,
i.e. something that would look more similar to a traditional RFC5280
certificate, would really be a separate item in the registry.
There is no reason such an external assertion can't cover a multitude of
HHITs (say, a month's worth of delivery drone) for the case where a new HHIT
will be used per Operation.

--
Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>, Sandelman Software Works

---

From: "Da Silva, Saulo" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 19:12:49 +0000

You have also to consider that not all small flying platforms will be considered for an airworthiness certificate. When modifications happen to an aircraft, there are procedures for recertification and in your case of modifications of small drones, they may not be under the purview of the convention on international civil aviation and guidance to manufacturers and operators will need to be developed.

From: Tm-rid <[email-masked]> On Behalf Of Card, Stu
Sent: 26-Aug-20 12:29 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [Drip] w/what part of an aircraft should its ID be associated?

This an attempt to kick off discussion on the list of a challenge we have been discussing in various other groups. My text below was sent to some but not all members of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Aviation Trust Framework Study Group (IATF/TFSG) in the context of attempting to capture requirements for a harmonized digital identifier for _all_ aircraft (and perhaps other entities in the aviation ecosystem).
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Stuart W. Card <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
Date: Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 12:52 PM
Subject: morphing ID? (was: Digital Identity use case)
...

==

.... while making the ID # seemingly pointless,
"the ID # identifies _itself_ statically, and everything else dynamically"
might actually be the right answer, as registry lookups can return
all the information of interest (IMO especially current aircraft characteristics,
current nation-state of registration, current registration number,
current registrant and current operator, albeit not necessarily all
in the same registry so recursive lookups likely would be needed)?
-----------------------------------------
Stuart W. Card, PhD, Principal Engineer
AX Enterprize, LLC  www.axenterprize.com<http://www.axenterprize.com>
4947 Commercial Drive, Yorkville NY 13495

---

From: Andrei Gurtov <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 09:11:00 +0200

I am sure they had such discussions in the context of cars and guns.
There are a couple of well-defined places where the serial number is
physically engraved. So as long as those parts are not changed, the
serial number and identity stays.

In the context of manned aircraft, there is a clear definition of being
airworthy. So in this case a serial number is like a certificate given
by authorities/manufacturer that the current collection of components
forms a capable aircraft. Any significant change of components means a
technical inspection and confirmation of the serial number&registration
(although I am sure it is still physically displayed somewhere on
aircraft body).

br Andrei

On 8/26/2020 6:29 PM, Card, Stu wrote:
> have been discussing in various other groups. My text below was sent
> to some but not all members of the International Civil Aviation
> Organization (ICAO) Aviation Trust Framework Study Group (IATF/TFSG)
> in the context of attempting to capture requirements for a harmonized
> From: *Stuart W. Card* <[email-masked]
> <mailto:[email-masked]>>
> AX Enterprize, LLC  www.axenterprize.com <http://www.axenterprize.com>

---

From: Robert Moskowitz <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 06:37:49 -0400

But how can a physically engraved ID equate to a digital ID?

We have been having this discussion in ICAO TRON wg.

It would be nice if Remote ID == flying thing ID, but it need not. 
Remote ID has some serious constraints in the 20 bytes size (much bigger 
than the 24 bits for manned aircraft today).

So we could be doing a namespace collision discussion and just confusing 
things.

That said, in multi-prop UA, the controller is as much of the craft for 
certification as the props are.  And then when the controller is 
replaced, the certification is voided and the craft needs a new one...

Challenging to say the least.

On 8/28/20 3:11 AM, Andrei Gurtov wrote:
> In the context of manned aircraft, there is a clear definition of 
> being airworthy. So in this case a serial number is like a certificate 
> given by authorities/manufacturer that the current collection of 
> components forms a capable aircraft. Any significant change of 
> components means a technical inspection and confirmation of the serial 
> number&registration (although I am sure it is still physically 
> displayed somewhere on aircraft body).
>
> br Andrei
>

-- 
Standard Robert Moskowitz
Owner
HTT Consulting
C:248-219-2059
F:248-968-2824
E:[email-masked]

There's no limit to what can be accomplished if it doesn't matter who 
gets the credit

---

From: Alexandre Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 17:36:29 +0200

> serial number and identity stays.

In the context of automobiles, there are many IDs.

There is this Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) engraved on a solid
part of the inner frame and under the windshield, and probably in other
places.  More:

- the list is non-exhaustive, as I am not a specialist and dont know
   them all.
- the license plate number.
- the ID of the mandatory insurance and of additional complimentary
   insurances.
- potentially the number of belonging to a club.
- an anti-steal ID engraved on windows.
- an RFID tag hidden at a strategic point known only by owner, and read
   when crossing a border.
- an ID of the GNSS tracking device (GPS, Galileo, etc.) with their
   2G/3G/4G identifiers but also of other long range UHF that might
   penetrate better through or around concrete, such as underground
   parking).  A car might have several built-in GPS devices.
- the IDs engraved in some critical parts, that will last probably as
   long as the automobile core identity lasts.  Such part is the 'engine
   cradle' on which the engine sits.  In worst crashes this part is an
   indicator, because it would suffer least deforming, when all else
   bent, melt or fused.  It's used, among other things, during insurance
   analysis.
- the names the owner might give to this particular automobile to
   distinguish it from a set of things alike.  This name might be just
   in one's mind (car1, car2, car3; or the small, the large, etc.), but
   it might also be printed on tags on QR codes and glued in some
   place where a camera can read it.
- the color of it, or the color scheme.  Some legislation imposes a
   single color per car.  These colors have codes, such as 'Yellow 48'
   and also codes for the method of realization 'metallic blue' but also
   more familiar codes like 'Chartres Blue' which is a Blue from the
   stained window of a monument.  Exceptions are allowed; these
   exceptions are very complex.  For example, it could be a car that is
   red in front and yellow in back; it's two colors but still legal.  It
   could be a painting made of small black and white triangles
   arbitrarily arranged, which is not a color per se but admitted as a
   color in test cars.
- the way in which law enforcement personnel identify automobiles when
   reporting to one another about a potential target: e.g. "une 208 grise
   matriculée BR" means it's a Peugeot 208 of gray color whose licence
   plate starts with BR.  It is an approximate visual identification.
   Despite this approximation it works perfectly fine in a small
   radio geographical area and at a given time.
- a signature of the visual identification as provided by a camera.

I guess for each of these ways to identifies automobiles there is a
similar way for drones or for flying taxis.

> being airworthy. So in this case a serial number is like a 
> certificate given by authorities/manufacturer that the current 
> collection of components forms a capable aircraft. Any significant 
> change of components means a technical inspection and confirmation
> of the serial number&registration (although I am sure it is still 
> physically displayed somewhere on aircraft body).

This airworthiness might have an equivalent in 'ratification' of
automobiles? ('homologation', fr.)

Independent DEKRA organisation and a few others do this 'ratification'
before new models could reach the public roads.  But recently a growing
number of automobile testing is ignoring extensively this 'ratification'.

Alex

>> This an attempt to kick off discussion on the list of a challenge 
>> we have been discussing in various other groups. My text below was 
>> sent to some but not all members of the International Civil 
>> Aviation Organization (ICAO) Aviation Trust Framework Study Group 
>> (IATF/TFSG) in the context of attempting to capture requirements 
>> for a harmonized digital identifier for _all_ aircraft (and
>> perhaps other entities in the aviation ecosystem).
>> 
>> ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: *Stuart W. Card* 
>> <[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>> 
>> Date: Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 12:52 PM Subject: morphing ID? (was: 
>> Digital Identity use case) ... Sounds like the serial number might 
>> be the _only_ part of the aircraft that can never change? ;-)
>> 
>> Molecules of matter, design into which those molecules are 
>> structured, resulting performance capabilities, all can evolve?
>> 
>> So, it becomes a tautology: the ID # identifies _itself_ 
>> statically, and everything else dynamically?
>> 
>> ==
>> 
>> small UAS at the test site where I work (whether due to wear, 
>> damage or experimentation). If we replaced them all at once, 
>> everyone would agree it is a different UA that should have a 
>> different serial number; but because we replace them over time, 
>> incrementally, it remains the "same" UA and retains the same
>> serial number? I don't claim that is wrong, just that it is
>> curious, probably counter-intuitive and possibly not ideal.
>> 
>> As long as the changes do not significantly alter the 
>> characteristics (major dimensions, mass, max climb rate, max air 
>> speed, maneuvering capabilities, payload capacity, wireless 
>> communications range, etc.), I see no problem with the aircraft 
>> retaining its identity and identifier; but if the aircraft is 
>> radically altered, it becomes a different aircraft, so perhaps 
>> should not retain its former ID.
>> 
>> .... while making the ID # seemingly pointless, "the ID # 
>> identifies _itself_ statically, and everything else dynamically" 
>> characteristics, current nation-state of registration, current 
>> registration number, current registrant and current operator, 
>> albeit not necessarily all in the same registry so recursive 
>> lookups likely would be needed)? 
>> ----------------------------------------- Stuart W. Card, PhD, 
>> Principal Engineer AX Enterprize, LLC www.axenterprize.com 
>> <http://www.axenterprize.com> 4947 Commercial Drive, Yorkville NY 
>> 13495
>> 
>> 
>

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 12:02:25 -0400

Hello Alex,

I agree that there are many IDs within the automotive. I provided a table of some of these IDs during IETF 108 and their inter-relation, see slide #4 - https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/108/slides/slides-108-drip-enabling-uas-registrationlookup-with-epp-and-rdap-managing-and-using-an-aviation-domain-hierarchy-00

In connection with your non-exhaustive list of additional identifiers you have provided, I believe the proposed draft that I am working on will demonstrate the ability (extensibility) of EPP and RDAP to potentially incorporates these additional identifiers/data points.

Best regards,

Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: Tm-rid <[email-masked]> On Behalf Of Alexandre Petrescu
Sent: Friday, August 28, 2020 11:36 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Drip] w/what part of an aircraft should its ID be associated?

There is this Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) engraved on a solid part of the inner frame and under the windshield, and probably in other places.  More:

   them all.

   insurances.

   when crossing a border.

   analysis.

   color in test cars.

I guess for each of these ways to identifies automobiles there is a similar way for drones or for flying taxis.

> displayed somewhere on aircraft body).

This airworthiness might have an equivalent in 'ratification' of automobiles? ('homologation', fr.)

before new models could reach the public roads.  But recently a growing number of automobile testing is ignoring extensively this 'ratification'.

Alex

>> Organization (ICAO) Aviation Trust Framework Study Group

>> (IATF/TFSG) in the context of attempting to capture requirements for 

>> a harmonized digital identifier for _all_ aircraft (and perhaps other 

>> entities in the aviation ecosystem).

>> < <mailto:[email-masked]%20%3cmailto:[email-masked]> [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>>

>> Digital Identity use case) ... Sounds like the serial number might be 

>> the _only_ part of the aircraft that can never change? ;-)

>> So, it becomes a tautology: the ID # identifies _itself_ statically, 

>> and everything else dynamically?

>> small UAS at the test site where I work (whether due to wear, damage 

>> or experimentation). If we replaced them all at once, everyone would 

>> agree it is a different UA that should have a different serial 

>> number; but because we replace them over time, incrementally, it 

>> remains the "same" UA and retains the same serial number? I don't 

>> claim that is wrong, just that it is curious, probably 

>> counter-intuitive and possibly not ideal.

>> capabilities, payload capacity, wireless communications range, etc.), 

>> I see no problem with the aircraft retaining its identity and 

>> identifier; but if the aircraft is radically altered, it becomes a 

>> different aircraft, so perhaps should not retain its former ID.

>> _itself_ statically, and everything else dynamically"

>> registration number, current registrant and current operator, albeit 

>> not necessarily all in the same registry so recursive lookups likely 

>> would be needed)?

>> Principal Engineer AX Enterprize, LLC  <http://www.axenterprize.com> www.axenterprize.com 

>> < <http://www.axenterprize.com> http://www.axenterprize.com> 4947 Commercial Drive, Yorkville NY

--

Tm-rid mailing list

 <mailto:[email-masked]> [email-masked]

 <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tm-rid> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tm-rid

---

From: Robert Moskowitz <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 12:16:52 -0400

I am not an aviation expert by any definition of such.  But years ago I 
was working with Boeing on use of HIP at the 777 manufacturing bay.  
Then I learned that every part of a plane and how it was used in 
assembly needs to be tracked in case NTSB needs the information. Pretty 
much everything is serialized, it seemed.  I recall an crash (Air Alaska 
MD80?) from somewhere in CA heading north over the Pacific coast.  It 
was determined it what the screw controlling the aileron?  Because of 
extensive data on all parts in the planes they supposedly were able to 
pull all similar planes for repairs and avoid more loss of life.

I personally was involved in a bad engine problem on my company vehicle 
when I worked at American Motors.  It was determined that the wrong 
temperature was noted when the cylinder shafts were bored and the wrong 
cylinder rings were used.  Because of data on my engine block (not the 
VIN), they were able to pull the whole family of engines (49 others) and 
replace the rings before they got in customer hands.  Expensive repair, 
but cheaper than 49 more ruined engine blocks (I got a replacement engine).

We are surrounded by numbers and identities.  But what is important 
here?  What can function as a UA Remote ID?  Can it be used for other 
UA/UAS/Aviation Identities; but this is secondary.

On 8/28/20 11:36 AM, Alexandre Petrescu wrote:
>>> in the context of attempting to capture requirements for a 
>>> harmonized digital identifier for _all_ aircraft (and
>>> <[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>> Date: 
>>> Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 12:52 PM Subject: morphing ID? (was: Digital 
>>> Identity use case) ... Sounds like the serial number might be the 
>>> _only_ part of the aircraft that can never change? ;-)
>>>
>>> remains the "same" UA and retains the same
>>> _itself_ statically, and everything else dynamically" might actually 
>>> be the right answer, as registry lookups can return
>>> would be needed)? ----------------------------------------- Stuart 
>>> W. Card, PhD, Principal Engineer AX Enterprize, LLC 
>>> www.axenterprize.com <http://www.axenterprize.com> 4947 Commercial 
>>> Drive, Yorkville NY 13495
>>>
>>>
>>
>

---

From: Robert Moskowitz <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 12:53:10 -0400

Oh, unless you are looking beyond Remote ID use of HHIT to other 
practical uses...

On 8/28/20 12:16 PM, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
> I am not an aviation expert by any definition of such.  But years ago 
> I was working with Boeing on use of HIP at the 777 manufacturing bay.  
> assembly needs to be tracked in case NTSB needs the information.  
> Pretty much everything is serialized, it seemed.  I recall an crash 
> (Air Alaska MD80?) from somewhere in CA heading north over the Pacific 
> coast.  It was determined it what the screw controlling the aileron?  
> Because of extensive data on all parts in the planes they supposedly 
> were able to pull all similar planes for repairs and avoid more loss 
> of life.
>
> I personally was involved in a bad engine problem on my company 
> vehicle when I worked at American Motors.  It was determined that the 
> wrong temperature was noted when the cylinder shafts were bored and 
> the wrong cylinder rings were used.  Because of data on my engine 
> block (not the VIN), they were able to pull the whole family of 
> engines (49 others) and replace the rings before they got in customer 
> hands.  Expensive repair, but cheaper than 49 more ruined engine 
> blocks (I got a replacement engine).
>

---

From: "Card, Stu" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 13:33:38 -0400

Just heard a space situational awareness operator mention that there are
discussions of "license plates" to facilitate ID & tracking of satellites!

On Fri, Aug 28, 2020, 12:53 PM Robert Moskowitz <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> Oh, unless you are looking beyond Remote ID use of HHIT to other practical
> uses...
>
> was working with Boeing on use of HIP at the 777 manufacturing bay.  Then I
> learned that every part of a plane and how it was used in assembly needs to
> be tracked in case NTSB needs the information.  Pretty much everything is
> serialized, it seemed.  I recall an crash (Air Alaska MD80?) from somewhere
> in CA heading north over the Pacific coast.  It was determined it what the
> screw controlling the aileron?  Because of extensive data on all parts in
> the planes they supposedly were able to pull all similar planes for repairs
> and avoid more loss of life.
>
> replace the rings before they got in customer hands.  Expensive repair, but
> cheaper than 49 more ruined engine blocks (I got a replacement engine).
>
> We are surrounded by numbers and identities.  But what is important here?
> What can function as a UA Remote ID?  Can it be used for other
> I am sure they had such discussions in the context of cars and guns. There
> are a couple of well-defined places where the serial number is physically
> engraved. So as long as those parts are not changed, the serial number and
> identity stays.
>
>
> airworthy. So in this case a serial number is like a certificate given by
> authorities/manufacturer that the current collection of components forms a
> capable aircraft. Any significant change of components means a technical
> inspection and confirmation
> _all_ aircraft (and
> ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: *Stuart W. Card* <
> [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>
> <[email-masked]>> Date: Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 12:52 PM Subject:
> morphing ID? (was: Digital Identity use case) ... Sounds like the serial
> number might be the _only_ part of the aircraft that can never change? ;-)
>
> experimentation). If we replaced them all at once, everyone would agree it
> is a different UA that should have a different serial number; but because
> we replace them over time, incrementally, it remains the "same" UA and
> retains the same
> capabilities, payload capacity, wireless communications range, etc.), I see
> no problem with the aircraft retaining its identity and identifier; but if
> the aircraft is radically altered, it becomes a different aircraft, so
> perhaps should not retain its former ID.
>
> _itself_ statically, and everything else dynamically" might actually be the
> right answer, as registry lookups can return
> characteristics, current nation-state of registration, current registration
> number, current registrant and current operator, albeit not necessarily all
> ----------------------------------------- Stuart W. Card, PhD, Principal
> Engineer AX Enterprize, LLC www.axenterprize.com
> <http://www.axenterprize.com> <http://www.axenterprize.com> 4947
> Commercial Drive, Yorkville NY 13495
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Robert Moskowitz
> Owner
> HTT Consulting
> C:      248-219-2059
> F:      248-968-2824
> E:      [email-masked]
>
> There's no limit to what can be accomplished if it doesn't matter who gets
> the credit
>
>
> --
> Robert Moskowitz
> Owner
> HTT Consulting
> C:      248-219-2059
> F:      248-968-2824
> E:      [email-masked]
>
> There's no limit to what can be accomplished if it doesn't matter who gets
> the credit
> --
> Tm-rid mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tm-rid
>

---

From: Robert Moskowitz <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 13:58:48 -0400

Well that is a little more remote than what we are doing here and more 
remote than some of the ICAO IATF discussions!

On 8/28/20 1:33 PM, Card, Stu wrote:
> Just heard a space situational awareness operator mention that there 
> are discussions of "license plates" to facilitate ID & tracking of 
> satellites!
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 28, 2020, 12:53 PM Robert Moskowitz 
> <[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:
>
>>     I am not an aviation expert by any definition of such.  But years
>>     ago I was working with Boeing on use of HIP at the 777
>>     manufacturing bay.  Then I learned that every part of a plane and
>>     how it was used in assembly needs to be tracked in case NTSB
>>     needs the information.  Pretty much everything is serialized, it
>>     seemed.  I recall an crash (Air Alaska MD80?) from somewhere in
>>     CA heading north over the Pacific coast.  It was determined it
>>     what the screw controlling the aileron? Because of extensive data
>>     on all parts in the planes they supposedly were able to pull all
>>     similar planes for repairs and avoid more loss of life.
>>
>>     vehicle when I worked at American Motors.  It was determined that
>>     the wrong temperature was noted when the cylinder shafts were
>>     bored and the wrong cylinder rings were used.  Because of data on
>>     my engine block (not the VIN), they were able to pull the whole
>>     family of engines (49 others) and replace the rings before they
>>     got in customer hands.  Expensive repair, but cheaper than 49
>>     more ruined engine blocks (I got a replacement engine).
>>
>>     We are surrounded by numbers and identities.  But what is
>>     important here?  What can function as a UA Remote ID?  Can it be
>>     used for other UA/UAS/Aviation Identities; but this is secondary.
>>
>>>>     I am sure they had such discussions in the context of cars and
>>>>     guns. There are a couple of well-defined places where the
>>>>     serial number is physically engraved. So as long as those parts
>>>>     are not changed, the serial number and identity stays.
>>>
>>>>     In the context of manned aircraft, there is a clear definition
>>>>     of being airworthy. So in this case a serial number is like a
>>>>     collection of components forms a capable aircraft. Any
>>>>     significant change of components means a technical inspection
>>>>     and confirmation
>>>>     of the serial number&registration (although I am sure it is
>>>>     still physically displayed somewhere on aircraft body).
>>>
>>>>>     This an attempt to kick off discussion on the list of a
>>>>>     challenge we have been discussing in various other groups. My
>>>>>     text below was sent to some but not all members of the
>>>>>     International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Aviation
>>>>>     Trust Framework Study Group (IATF/TFSG) in the context of
>>>>>     attempting to capture requirements for a harmonized digital
>>>>>     identifier for _all_ aircraft (and
>>>>>     <[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>
>>>>>     <mailto:[email-masked]>
>>>>>     <mailto:[email-masked]>> Date: Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at
>>>>>     12:52 PM Subject: morphing ID? (was: Digital Identity use
>>>>>     case) ... Sounds like the serial number might be the _only_
>>>>>     part of the aircraft that can never change? ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>>     different serial number; but because we replace them over
>>>>>     time, incrementally, it remains the "same" UA and retains the
>>>>>     same
>>>>>     characteristics (major dimensions, mass, max climb rate, max
>>>>>     air speed, maneuvering capabilities, payload capacity,
>>>>>     wireless communications range, etc.), I see no problem with
>>>>>     the aircraft retaining its identity and identifier; but if the
>>>>>     aircraft is radically altered, it becomes a different
>>>>>     identifies _itself_ statically, and everything else
>>>>>     dynamically" might actually be the right answer, as registry
>>>>>     lookups can return
>>>>>      all the information of interest (IMO especially current
>>>>>     aircraft characteristics, current nation-state of
>>>>>     registration, current registration number, current registrant
>>>>>     and current operator, albeit not necessarily all in the same
>>>>>     registry so recursive lookups likely would be needed)?
>>>>>     <http://www.axenterprize.com> <http://www.axenterprize.com>
>>>>>     <http://www.axenterprize.com> 4947 Commercial Drive, Yorkville
>>>>>     NY 13495
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>     -- 
>>     Robert Moskowitz
>>     Owner
>>     HTT Consulting
>>     C: 248-219-2059
>>     F: 248-968-2824
>>     E: [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>
>>
>>     There's no limit to what can be accomplished if it doesn't matter
>>     who gets the credit
>>
>
>     -- 
>     Robert Moskowitz
>     Owner
>     HTT Consulting
>     C: 248-219-2059
>     F: 248-968-2824
>     E: [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>
>
>     There's no limit to what can be accomplished if it doesn't matter
>     who gets the credit
>     -- 
>     Tm-rid mailing list
>     [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>