UAS's (unmanned aerial systems) is a broad term used to describe powered vehicles that fly through the air, controlled by computer programming or remotely located operators. As technology has increased over the years, these have developed from small, basic radio controlled (RC) airplanes into complex, expensive RC airplanes and into affordable drones such as quadcopters (4 engine helicopter style drones). The relative simplicity and affordability, coupled with proven technology and military applications, has lead to a recent surge in promoting the integration of certain UAS's into the National Airspace System for commercial purposes.
(1) Currently, civilian use of UAS's is restricted to recreational use only, unless they obtain a waiver from the FAA. People that use them in a fashion similar to model aircraft don't need FAA permission to operate them. People can be held liable, however, if they fly over people or in a manner that endangers people, property, or wildlife. The new regulations are being written to provide rules for non-recreational use, or essentially, commercial use. These rules would allow for commercial use in areas that are already permitted by the FAA via a certificate of waiver or authorization (COA), but would be on a certified, permanent basis rather than a case by case basis. The ability to apply for these permits came about with the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FAA, 2015). Currently, companies can use UAS's for things like hurricane hunting, search and rescue, wildlife conservation, and 3-D mapping (Handwerk, 2013). Also, utilizing drones for aeronautical research is permitted, which is what Amazon is doing with the drones they plan to use for commercial shipping operations. Finally, some UAS's are being used for commercial aerial photography or cinematography as well.
The companies that obtain the COA's are expected to follow the guidelines set in advisory circular 91-57A, as well as be registered prior to the application for the COA (FAA, 2015). These guidelines are the baseline for the rules that are supposed to be finalized any day now for future commercial use of drones. In addition to the vague, safety guidelines in the AC, the new rules will impose an altitude limit, speed limit, weight limit, daylight operations only limit, and limits on what weather operators can launch flights into. Other things will include proper registration markings, proper maintenance, and pre-flight inspections of the UAS also. Finally, operators will have to pass an initial aerial knowledge test, obtain an operator certificate and small UAS rating, and provide the ability for the FAA to conduct inspections of the operation. Although these might seem costly and restrictive, the worst part for commercial operations is that the UAS must remain within visual line of sight (VLOS) of the operator. This would most likely prevent Amazon from initiating it's GPS based package delivery system, at least for now.
(2) I do believe we are going to see full integration of not only small UAS's, but full scale remotely piloted vehicles (RPV) as well. The administrator, Michael Huerta, has identified this integration process as a priority item for the FAA over the next few years (FAA, 2015). The current NPRM for commercial use of UAS's is supposed to be passed into law any day now, meaning the initial implementation, with all of the restrictions on speed, weight, and altitude, will be the first step toward full integration. Assuming that we don't see any accidents specifically related to mechanical or electronic signals transmission issues, the next step would be to reduce those limits and allow these vehicles to proceed at altitudes and speeds that could match manned aircraft.
Current programming and GPS navigation systems are already physically capable of beyond VLOS capabilities, including take off, landing/ dropping a parcel, and returning to base (RTB). There are shelf available quad-copters that can even do this. A proper pre-flight inspection to assure the engines run and there is enough battery life for the flight could be the last line of defense before a sightless vehicle completely enters manned airspace on a programmed flight profile. This is how most of the military RPV's operate to and from their area of responsibility, the only difference being they have pilots overseeing the entire process. Another issue would be that of making in flight corrections. The weather can change along the route of flight, VFR manned aircraft could be practicing maneuvers near a "highway" (as proposed by Amazon), and without a direct connection to ATC, changing the flight path of the UAS might not be an option. The remote operators will have an extremely difficult time building a big picture of the operating airspace with out proper communications.
The perception problem coming from the public's eye is going to be extremely similar to that of the commercial space travel issue. The inherent danger, coupled with America's drama driven mass media sources, will be plenty to establish a giant, skeptical public stance against integration above the limitations in the upcoming legislation. Logistical issues will play a part in the defense as well, because ATC is going to have to account for these vehicles and will absolutely need a tool for spacing and collision avoidance between all aircraft in the busiest airspace on Earth. Terrifying stories of crashes and close encounters, like the ones I have from Afghanistan, will provide real world experience instead of just think tank theories. These collisions are an existing problem to the full integration of these vehicles.
(3)The military version of these drones has definitely changed the strategic approach taken by military leadership in the war on terror. Loss of life has been a tragic cost of making war since the dawn of time, and the cost went way up with the invention and application of complex military aircraft. With drones, the loss of the pilot and flight crew is not a loss that needs to be weighed in decision making for specific missions, or even entering entire conflicts.
Their integration into military operations has been relatively efficient, with a handful of setbacks along the way. The initial problems came with world wide satellite connectivity and the response of the drone to the loss there of. After some initial crashes, computer programming alleviated the problem with automatic RTB programs installed prior to the drones taking off. This allowed the drones to come home and land automatically if connectivity never gets restored (if the antenna is shot off for example). The worst part of this problem is the drone being programmed to climb in an attempt to regain the signal. The drones I flew next too would climb directly through anything and everything flying above it, without question of collision avoidance. That could not be an option for drones in the US NAS.
I was a part of a special program that was thrown together to fight the opposite side of the efficiency coin, and that was the fact that they couldn't build drones fast enough to meet war-fighters needs on the ground in Afghanistan from 2009 until the current draw-down. The cost and manufacturing process was too high, slow, and complex, so the military slapped together some MC-12W's (Beechcraft King Air 350 ER's) to fill the void in airborne intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) until that process was more streamlined.
Ethically speaking, I don't believe the strategy has changed. Collateral damage has been another sad cost of war, and will continue to be far into the future. Manned coalition aircraft have been as much or more of an issue than drones have been in this facet, including accidental friendly fire situations like the one from F-15's on Canadian ground forces. There is only so much intelligence you can gather and restrictions you can set on when an aircraft can fire before the war effort becomes futile and far too expensive to keep up.
(4)I found a link to a job opportunity with Northrop Grumman as an RPV pilot, as found here:
https://ngc.taleo.net/careersection/ngc_pro/jobdetail.ftl?job=15004153&lang=en
References:
AC 91-57A. (2015, September 2). Retrieved October 5, 2015, from
http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_91-57A.pdf
Handwerk, B. (2013, December 2). 5 Surprising Drone Uses (Besides Amazon Delivery). Retrieved
October 5, 2015, from http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/12/131202-drone-uav-uas-
amazon-octocopter-bezos-science-aircraft-unmanned-robot/
UAS Flyer. (n.d.). Retrieved October 2, 2015, from
https://www.faa.gov/uas/publications/media/27231_FAA_UAS_Flyer_lores.pdf
UAS Registration Letter. (n.d.). Retrieved October 5, 2015, from
https://www.faa.gov/uas/regulations_policies/media/Registration_letter.pdf
SUAS Proposed Rule Summary. (n.d.). Retrieved October 5, 2015, from
https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/media/021515_sUAS_Summary.pdf
I think they would have to rethink that whole “lost comms procedure” for UAV’s in our domestic airspace, a direct climb out through whatever and however wouldn’t cut it here. (and sounds like a bad idea OCONUS as well) It does sounds like the eventual legislation will have a definite ceiling, and restrictions from airports, etc. While I don’t like the idea of the little ones buzzing around anywhere, the FAA and justice department just needs to have stiff enough penalties that discourages that troublesome teen or other joker who may want to fly a micro UAV where it ought not be.
ReplyDelete“Drone being programmed to climb in an attempt to regain the signal” would be a major problem in the NAS. This is a scary thought for me. I think that UAV’s can be beneficial in the National Air Space (NAS) but not with this issue. I think this issue will cause more harm then good. Before UAVs are introduced into the NAS their collision avoidance system must be improved the automatic climbing will not be permitted along side commercial, and general aviation aircraft. New programs and procedure will need to be created to resolve the lost signal climbing.
ReplyDeleteI agree the drones being programmed as is with the systems you worked with could pose serious hazards (climbing regardless to reacquire signal), but other systems and protocol could be put in place to allow safer integration into the NAS. I can't say I know of one that would work off the top of my head, but I know that those sort of problems are what engineers live for. Integration into the NAS is inevitable in my opinion, and any bugs and issues will obviously be dealt with before full integration happens.
ReplyDelete