Domain
Name air, inland water, sea surface, subsea and transition conditions separately.
Scope boundary · 20
One domain approval is not cross-domain proof
Keep aviation, surface-shipping, hydrographic and underwater evidence attached to their physics, rules and mission scope.
Evidence statusCross-domain mission framework · vehicle, operation and jurisdiction validation requiredLast reviewed: 15 August 2026
20
FUURAA thesis
Shared autonomy software does not erase domain-specific vehicles, operators, hazards, authorities or evidence thresholds.
Engineering map
Turn the title into engineering objects that can be observed, measured and reviewed.
Each layer states the boundary to establish and the evidence needed for the next decision.
Authority
Map applicable regulators, standards, navigation rules and local permissions.
Transfer
Identify which component evidence transfers and which system evidence must be repeated.
Verification questions
Write the questions first, then decide whether a demo, test, pilot or operating record can answer them.
Each question needs an object, conditions, denominator, threshold and accountable decision owner.
- 01
What exact domain produced the evidence?
- 02
Which rules change at the boundary?
- 03
Does common software face the same sensors and hazards?
- 04
What verification must be repeated?
Evidence to preserve
Enable the next reader to reconstruct conditions, results, failures and the decision.
A conclusion alone loses reviewability; raw records, configuration and exclusions matter too.
- 01
Evidence package 1
Domain and authority applicability matrix
- 02
Evidence package 2
Evidence-transfer rationale
- 03
Evidence package 3
Gap test and reauthorisation record
Scope boundary
State what this evidence still cannot be generalised to.
- 01
An aircraft standard, ship code, hydrographic practice or AUV example cannot approve another vehicle class or jurisdiction.
- 02
This is an engineering reading and decision framework; it does not replace application-specific risk assessment, conformity work, procurement acceptance or professional advice.
Sources and evidence status
Read standards scope, measurement evidence and application conclusions separately.
Source dates and review status remain visible; external sources open in a new tab.
01
ISO · Published 2026-08-07 · Edition 3
↗02ISO 21384-3:2026 — Uncrewed aircraft operational procedures
Specifies requirements for safe commercial UAS operations, including external safety-critical command-and-control services.
FAA · Updated 2026-06-09 · verified 2026-08-15
↗03Commercial small-UAS operator requirements
Explains Part 107 remote-pilot certification, recurrent knowledge, weather, loading, emergency, maintenance and night-operation requirements.
IMO · Adopted 2026-05 · effective 2026-07-01
↗04International Code of Safety for Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships
Establishes a goal-based framework for MASS design, operation and certification, including modes, operational limits, remote centres, cybersecurity and human oversight.
NOAA Ocean Exploration · Updated 2022-04-25 · verified 2026-08-15
↗05Autonomous Underwater Vehicles
Describes untethered AUVs executing planned missions, storing payload data, surfacing for communications and requiring later recovery and processing.
International Hydrographic Review / IHO · Published 2020-11-30 · updated 2021-09-21
↗Hydrographic survey with autonomous surface vehicles
Separates remote piloting from several autonomy levels and links supervision to traffic, hazards, weather, sensors, communications and recovery.