NAVORA guides operators through structured SORA review workflows across Operations Manual, GRC, ARC, SAIL, evidence tracking, and review package preparation — supporting both SORA 2.0 and SORA 2.5 paths.
Systematic risk assessment structure for unmanned aircraft operations in the Specific category.
Step 1 defines the operational basis by recording the mission profile, operating mode (VLOS, EVLOS, or BVLOS), flight locations, UAS type, maximum operational altitude, and maximum operational speed. This information is used to establish the flight geography, contingency volume, and ground risk buffer that bound the operation and serve as the geometric foundation for all subsequent SORA steps. The platform supports GIS drawing and KML/KMZ ingestion for Flight Geography definition, validates mission parameters against declared operational limits, and records a structured Operations Manual for operator review.
Step 2 determines the intrinsic Ground Risk Class (iGRC) by combining the UAS maximum characteristic dimension and maximum operational speed with the population density across the flight geography, contingency volume, and ground risk buffer. Step 3 then applies ground-risk mitigations to derive the final GRC: strategic mitigations include sheltering (M1A), operational restrictions such as route cordons or population avoidance (M1B), and ground observation (M1C), while M2 mitigations address UA impact dynamics through means such as parachutes or other impact-energy-limiting technology. The platform maps population density, evaluates mitigation applicability against the relevant rules, and keeps traceable links to supporting documentation.
Step 4 characterizes the airspace associated with the operation to assign the initial Air Risk Class (ARC), reflecting the generic mid-air collision risk before mitigations are applied. The assessment considers the airspace class (A through G), the presence of controlled airspace, proximity to aerodromes, and any ATZ, TMZ, or RMZ designations in the area of the operational volume. The initial ARC is assigned for both the operational volume and the adjacent airspace where relevant. The workflow supports airspace lookup, controlled-airspace detection, aerodrome proximity review, and structured documentation of the ARC assignment and its supporting reasoning.
Step 5 applies strategic air-risk mitigations to the initial ARC to determine the residual ARC, which represents the remaining mid-air collision risk after pre-flight controls are taken into account. Applicable strategic mitigations include spatial restrictions, altitude restrictions, temporal restrictions, operational-area limitations, and coordination with the relevant air navigation service provider or competent authority. The residual ARC directly drives the TMPR level determined in Step 6. The platform records selected restrictions, eligibility reasoning, and supporting references for review.
Step 6 determines the Tactical Mitigation Performance Requirement (TMPR) from the residual ARC, defining the level of tactical mitigation needed to reduce residual mid-air collision risk within the operational volume. For VLOS operations this involves a VLOS deconfliction scheme; for BVLOS operations it requires a qualified Detect-and-Avoid architecture covering the Detect, Decide, Command, Execute, and Feedback Loop functions. Step 8 determines the containment requirements, assessing the risk of a loss of control resulting in the UA leaving the operational volume and entering the adjacent area, and defining whether Low, Medium, or High containment robustness is required. The platform supports both assessments through containment workflows, adjacent-area calculations, TMPR level assignment, DAA-function mapping, and evidence management for technical and procedural containment means.
Step 7 combines the final GRC and residual ARC using the SORA SAIL determination matrix to assign a Specific Assurance and Integrity Level from SAIL I to SAIL VI. The assigned SAIL then drives Step 9, which identifies the applicable Operational Safety Objectives (OSOs) and the required robustness level — Low, Medium, or High — for each one, covering UAS design, operational procedures, crew qualification, maintenance, external services, and organizational management. The workflow supports SAIL matrix lookup, maps the applicable OSO set with robustness assignments, and links each requirement to the corresponding operations manual section and supporting evidence.
Step 10 assembles the Comprehensive Safety Portfolio, which compiles the SORA risk assessment, operations manual references, compliance matrix, and supporting evidence into a structured review package for the operator to review before any external submission process. The CSP provides a traceable record of how each safety requirement arising from the risk assessment — including mitigations, TMPR, containment requirements, and OSOs — is addressed in the operations manual and supporting documentation. The platform prepares a formatted assessment package, indexes supporting references, and shows document completeness before the operator proceeds.
The SORA methodology is a risk-proportionate safety assessment process established by JARUS for unmanned aircraft operations in the Specific category. It systematically evaluates ground and air collision risks across ten structured steps to determine Specific Assurance and Integrity Levels (SAIL) and derive the required Operational Safety Objectives (OSOs).
Step through the structured 5-stage workflow to prepare safety portfolios for review.