Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM) is an active research subject as its proposed applications are increasing. UTM aims to enable a variety of UAS operations, including package delivery, infrastructure inspection, and emergency missions. That creates the need for extensive research on how to incorporate such traffic, as conventional methods and operations used in Air Traffic Management (ATM) are not suitable for constrained urban airspace. This paper proposes and compares several traffic capacity balancing methods developed for a UTM system designed to be used in highly dense, very low-level urban airspace. Three types of location-based dynamic traffic capacity management techniques are tested: street-based, grid-based, and cluster-based. The proposed systems are tested by simulating traffic within mixed (constrained and open) urban airspace based on the city of Vienna at five different traffic densities. Results show that using local, area-based clustering for capacity balancing within a UTM system improves safety, efficiency, and capacity metrics, especially when simulated or historical traffic data are used.

Metropolis II aims to provide insights in what is needed to enable high-density urban air operations. It does this by investigating the foundation for U-space U3/U4 services. The final goal is to provide a unified approach for strategic deconfliction, tactical deconfliction, and dynamic capacity management. Highly-dense operations in constrained urban airspace will likely require a degree of complexity that does not exist in modern-day air traffic management. The expected high traffic demand will require a shared use of the airspace instead of assigning exclusive use of blocks of the airspace to some flights. A unified approach for traffic management is needed because at high-densities, airspace design, flight planning, and separation management become increasingly interdependent. Metropolis II builds upon the results of the first Metropolis project. Three concepts with a varying degree of centralisation will be compared using simulations. (1) The centralised concept will take a global approach for separation management. (2) The decentralised concept aims to give the individual agents separation responsibility. (3) The hybrid concept tries to combine a centralised strategic planning agent with a robust tactical separation strategy.