. Route client 302 may be a client that exchanges information with FMS 110A using external bus 306. Route client 302 may be a navigation or pilot module that provides route information to UAV 102 and makes requests to route UAV 102 as needed. Route client 302 may query FMS 110A for route instructions or a reroute from a current route based on some criteria.

Avoidance source 304 also may be a client of FMS 110A that detects threats to UAV 102 or obstacles to be avoided. Avoidance source 304 may be a camera, radar, or other component to detect and track an object. Avoidance source 304 also may analyze a threat or obstacle to generate an avoidance importance score 324. Avoidance source 304 may assign this score based on the immediacy to avoid the threat or obstacle along with the detected capability of the threat or obstacle. For example, a missile emplacement will have a higher avoidance importance score 324 than a building in the distance. In some embodiments, more than one avoidance source 304 is connected to FMS 110A.

FMS 110A exchanges data with avoidance source 304 using external bus 306. External bus 306 may be connected to other subsystems within UAV 102. External bus 306 is connected to route manager 308 and avoidance handler 310 within FMS 110A, but also may be connected to other components.

FMS 110A includes route manager 308, avoidance handler 310, and rerouter 314. Route manager 308 may act as a decision maker within FMS 110A. Route manager 308 collects avoidances, scores, source type, and add weights, as disclosed below. It also may assign a complexity score to a reroute request 326 from route client 302. This feature allows route manager 308 to have a notion of the complexity of routes and the difficulty in implementing the route. Route manager 308 also may apply thresholds to scores to determine whether to reroute UAV 102. Route manager 308 may decide to reroute UAV 102 by taking in all the data and information available to FMS 110A. Route manager 308 may interact with clients outside FMS 110A, such as route client 302 and avoidance handler 304.

Avoidance handler 310 receives data and information from avoidance source 304 from external bus 306 and takes these to internal bus 312. Internal bus 312 allows route manager 308, avoidance handler 310, and rerouter 314 to communicate internally within FMS 110A. Avoidance handler 310 distributes avoidances to inter-application bus 316. Avoidance issues may be provided to other UAVs through inter-application bus 316 but this allows FMS 110A to at least note internally.

Rerouter 314 may stored the threshold for routing complexity based on environment resources. Rerouter 314 determines whether to send a reroute, or route adjustment, request 326 to a rerouting client 320 or to inter-application bus 316. If the route complexity score provided by route manager 308 for request 326 is below the complexity threshold, then rerouter 314 will forward request 326 to rerouting client 320. If the route complexity score is equal or above the complexity threshold, then rerouter 314 forwards request 326 to inter-application communication component 318 via inter-application bus 316.

Rerouting client 320 implements a rerouting function that inputs a route and route adjustment request 326. Rerouting client 320 then generates a new route 328 for UAV 102. Rerouting client 320 provides new route 328 back to rerouter 314 so that FMS 110A can then direct the navigation system of UAV 102 to take the new route to avoid the threat or obstacle detected by avoidance source 304. In some embodiments, rerouting client 320 has a 1-1 relationship with FMS 110A.

In some instances, the complexity for rerouting UAV 102 is too much for FMS 110A to process. For example, UAV 102 may not have local access to important information like avoidances. Another UAV may have access to this information. Further, FMS 110A may not have the processing resources to generate a complicated reroute or reroutes. Thus, FMS 110A can take advantage of the plurality of UAVs connected to UAV 102 to obtain this information or process the reroute request.

For these situations, FMS 110A forwards request 326 to inter-application communication component 318 along with avoidances associated with the request as provided by avoidance handler 310 to other platforms connected to UAV 102. Inter-application component 318 also receives feedback 330 from the other platforms and provides this to FMS 110A.

Feedback 330 may be information needed for rerouting client 320 to perform the rerouting, such as avoidance information not available to avoidance source 304. It also may be other avoidances detected by the other platforms that is used by rerouting client 320. Feedback 330 also may be the new route for UAV 102 as generated by another platform connected to UAV 102. Feedback 330 is provided to FMS 110A so that the flight management system may take further action without comprising the integrity of the reroute decision due to insufficient information or processing shortfalls.

FIG. 4A depicts a block diagram of the data flow in generating route adjustment request 326 within route manager 308 according to the disclosed embodiments. First avoidance source 304A, second avoidance source 304B, and other additional avoidance sources provide data to route manager 308. Route manager 308 then determines when to generate route adjustment request 326.

First avoidance source 304A and second avoidance source 304B correspond to avoidance source 304, disclosed above. The avoidance sources may be client systems that provide data to and take instruction from FMS 110A. The avoidance sources may use a message data structure or an application programming interface (API) to communicate with FMS 110A. Incoming data for avoidances may be provided to external bus 306 then to route manager 308. First avoidance source 304A differs from second avoidance source 304B in terms of the type of data provided and overall purpose for UAV 102. For example, first avoidance source 304A may detect missile emplacements while second avoidance source 304B may detect weather.

First avoidance source 304A generates avoidance information 402. Avoidance information 402 may be provided over a time period such that different packets of information are received in order, such as information A1, information A2, and so on to information AN. Each packet of avoidance information 402 also includes a score 404. Scores may be determined based on the level of importance for the generated information and may vary for each piece of information. For example, information A1 has a score of X1, information A2 has a score of X2, and so on to information AN having a score of XN.

This relationship also exists for second avoidance source 304B. It generates avoidance information 406. For example, avoidance information 406 includes information B1, information B2, and so on to information BN. Each packet of avoidance information also includes a score 408, based on the level of importance for the generated information that varies for each piece of information. Thus, information B1 has a score of Y1, information B2 has a score of Y2, and so on to information BN having a score of YN.

As can be appreciated, information from different avoidance sources may have different levels of importance when it comes to rerouting UAV 102. The disclosed embodiments may assign weights to information as it is received by route manager 308. These weights may be assigned within route manager 308, as shown in FIG. 4A, or by the respective avoidance handler. Weights assigned to avoidance sources that are deemed more important in avoiding threats or obstacles are higher than avoidance sources that are not so important.

For example, first avoidance source 304A is deemed more important than second avoidance source 304B. Thus, first weight WX 410 is applied to scores 404 of information 402 received from first avoidance source 304A. First weight WX 410 is higher than second weight WY, which is applied to scores 408 of information 406 received from second avoidance source 304B. As route manager 308 monitors incoming information from the avoidance sources, more data or information from first avoidance source 304A will prompt generation of request 326 faster than data or information from second avoidance source 304B.

Route manager 308 includes a total avoidance importance score 414, or TAIS. Total avoidance importance score 414 is the aggregate scores of information provided by the avoidance sources. It starts at 0 and gradually increments as information is received by route manager 308. When a request 326 is generated, total avoidance importance score 414 is reset to 0 as a route adjustment request should avoid the threat or obstacle detected by UAV 102 as the UAV is directed to a new route.

Referring to FIG. 4A, as route manager 308 receives information 402 from first avoidance source 304A and information 406 from second avoidance source 304B, it multiplies scores 404 by first weight WX 410 and scores 408 by second weight WY 412. Route manager 308 adds the results of these operations to total avoidance importance score 414. Thus, the operations may have the following relationship

TAIS=Current TAIS+(WX*X1)+(WX*X2)+ . . . (WX*XN)+(WY*Y1)+(WY*Y2)+ . . . (WY*YN), Equation 1

- wherein Current TAIS is the current total avoidance importance score when information 402 or information 406 is received.

Route manager 308 also includes a request threshold value 416, or Ta, that is used to determine when total avoidance importance score 414 has reached a level to generate request 326. In other words, the importance of the information provided by the avoidance sources as at a level that a route adjustment needs to be made. Request threshold value 416 may be set before UAV 102 commences operations. For example, if UAV 102 includes sensitive materials, then request threshold value 416 may be set lower than a UAV merely doing surveillance.

When TAIS>Ta, then route manager 308 generates request 326. This operation may be performed by comparator 418, as configured within route manager 308. Route manager 308 may monitor updates to total avoidance importance score 414 and compare any changes to the TAIS value to request threshold value 416. When it is determined a reroute is needed, route manager 308 generates request 326. Total avoidance importance score 414 is reset to zero, or TAIS=0.

FIG. 4B depicts a block diagram of the data flow in determining a route complexity score 462 for a route adjustment request 326 according to the disclosed embodiments. Route manager 308 also generates route complexity score 462 based on received data and information from components within UAV 102. Route complexity score 462 is provided with route adjustment request 326 to rerouter 314 and is used to determine how the request is handled.

Route manager 308 may generate route complexity score 462 similar to total avoidance importance score 414 in that it accumulates information and scores until request 326 is generated. The scores, however, are different. Total avoidance importance score 414 relates to how important the accumulated avoidances, through information 402 and 406, are, and whether they should trigger a route adjustment. Route complexity score 462 relates to how complex, or how difficult to calculate, a particular request 326 may be.

Information on the current route may be provided to route manager 308. This information may be provided from different components on UAV 102, such as route client 302 or avoidance source 304A or 304B. Other components also may provide information. Thus, information 450 is received having scores 452. Additional information 454 also may be received having scores 456. An example of such information may be the number of current waypoints in the current route, as provided by route client 302.

Information 450 may be separated by some criteria into information R1, information R2, and information R3. Using the above example, each information may be related to a waypoint in the current route. Each information also has an associated score for that piece of information. Information R1 has a score of P1, information R2 has a score of P2, and so on to information RN having a score of PN. This same relationship of information and scores may be found for additional information 454. Information O1 has a score of Q1, information O2 has a score of Q2, and so on to information ON having a score of QN.

As information 450 and additional information 454 are received by route manager 308, scores 452 and 456 are accumulated. The scores also may be associated with weights so that route complexity information that is more determinative of the complexity of a reroute is given greater importance within route complexity score 462. First weight WP 458 may be applied to scores 452. Second weight WQ 460 may be applied to scores 456. Much like Equation 1 for TAIS, route complexity score 462, or RCS, may be updated with the products of the scores and weights, or

RCS=Current RCS+(WP*P1)+(WP*P2)+ . . . (WP*PN)+(WQ*Q1)+(WQ*Q2)+ . . . (WQ*QN), Equation 2

- wherein Current RCS is the current route complexity score when information 450 or additional information 454 is received.

When request 326 is generated by route manager 308, the current value for route complexity score 462 is determined. In some embodiments, route manager