ASCI 638, Assignment 7.7,Operational Risk Management

The AeroVironment RQ-11 Raven is a small unmanned aerial system (UAS) built for intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) missions.  The aircraft has a length of three feet, a wingspan of 4.5 feet, and weighs about 4.2 pounds.  The unmanned aircraft typically operates at altitudes of 100 to 500 feet, can reach speeds of 50 miles per hour, and has an endurance of 1.5 hours.  The Raven is equipped with electro-optical and infrared cameras on gimballed mounts for stability.  The ground control station (GCS) is a highly portable, compact, and lightweight system providing a terminal for imagery and video display.  The UAS is hand-launched and recovered with an automated flight program that brings the aircraft to a stall near the ground.  The Raven and its GCS have a line-of-sight (LOS) control range of up to six miles in day or night operations.  The UAS can be manually flown via the GCS or autonomously operated to GPS waypoints designated by the operator (AeroVironment, 2016).

The hand launching technique of getting the Raven airborne obviates the requirement for a launching mechanism and its logistical footprint.  However, this technique is also the source of great potential for mishaps and crashes during take-off.  Proficiency and consistency in throwing techniques varies widely with each person.  An improper launch can place the aircraft at an attitude and altitude that the operator cannot recover from.  The out-of-control Raven could collide with terrain, vehicles, equipment, vegetation, or personnel.  Although safety measures can be taken to ensure personnel remain clear of the intended flight path, the personnel performing the hand launch must be in close proximity.  An out-of-control Raven could deviate significantly from the intended flight path and strike personnel standing in what was thought to be a safe location (Why Soldiers Hate the Raven UAV, 2012).  Although the probability of a 4.2 pound object causing serious injury is most likely low, it is best to mitigate that risk.  A good launch is a significant factor in the operator’s chances to control and climb the aircraft away from the initial throw (Good Raven Launch, 2014). 

Another issue with hand launching the Raven is the potential close proximity to which the UAS’ propeller comes to the launcher’s head.  Depending on the arm motion, the launcher could be injured by a propeller strike and the aircraft could also be damaged in the process.  The exposed propeller also presents a hazard if the launcher is holding the UAS in the wrong spot.   Injury could also be inflicted if the motor is inadvertently started before the launcher is ready and has a hand within the propeller arc (Why Soldiers Hate the Raven UAV, 2012).

A solution to significantly reduce the Raven’s launch risks is a mechanical system to send the UAS airborne.  A system similar to the catapult used to launch the Boeing/Insitu ScanEagle would be suitable (Insitu, 2016).  A smaller, lighter, and more portable version would be sufficient for the lighter, smaller Raven while keeping the logistical footprint small.  A mechanical system would remove the uncertain nature of improper form in manual launches.  A catapult would also allow all personnel to distance themselves from the UAS as it is launched.

References:

 

AeroVironment.  (2016).  RQ-11B Raven [Fact Sheet].  Retrieved from

http://www.avinc.com/uas/view/raven

Good Raven Launch [Video File].  Retrieved from

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2hi6F5DKAE

Insitu.  (2016).  ScanEagle [Fact Sheet].  Retrieved from https://insitu.com/information-

            delivery/unmanned-systems/scaneagle

Why Soldiers Hate the Raven UAV [Video File].  Retrieved from http://www.military.com/

            video/aircraft/pilotless-aircraft/why-soldiers-hate-the-raven-uav/1661802396001