ASCI 637, Assignment 5.3, UAS Use

Source Article:

sUAS News Staff.  (2016, February 23).  UAV Challenge Medical Express 2016.  sUAS News.  Retrieved from http://www.suasnews.com/2015/02/uav-challenge-medical-express-2016/

From 2007 to 2014, an annual competition known as the UAV Outback Challenge was organized by the Australian Research Centre for Aerospace Automation (ARCAA).  The competition was staged out of Kingaroy Airport in Queensland, Australia.  The UAV Outback Challenge’s goal was for teams operating unmanned aerial systems (UAS) to conduct a search and rescue (SAR) mission into the Australian Outback and drop a water bottle within a designated zone.  Teams were awarded points based on mission time, accuracy of task performance, and technical merit of the team’s aircraft (Roberts et al., 2015, p. 2-3).

            The main task of the competition centers on “Outback Joe”.  “Outback Joe” is a colorfully attired dummy placed in a remote location in the Queensland Outback.  The competitors’ tasks are to operate a UAS to locate the dummy and then perform a specific task.  From 2007 to 2014, the task was to drop a water bottle within a 100 meter radius from “Outback Joe”.  In 2014, four teams successfully completed the objectives of the competition (Roberts et al, 2015, p. 2,4).  In 2015, ARCAA announced a successor competition named the UAV Challenge Medical Express to be held in Dalby, Queensland.  The objectives of the contest will be for competitors to operate up to two UAS simultaneously to locate “Outback Joe”, land near the dummy, allow a contest official to load a simulated blood sample onto the aircraft, and return the UAS and payload safely to the point of origin (sUAS News Staff, 2016).  The search area will be larger than the previous contest and the complexity of the contest has increased.  The terrain that “Outback Joe” will be set will also require UAS to be capable of vertical take-off and landing (UAV Challenge Staff, 2016).

            The contests held by ARCAA demonstrate the utility of unmanned aircraft in SAR roles.  The tasks are realistic, challenging, and inspire innovation by the competitors.  The lessons learned and usefulness demonstrated by the competing teams may motivate civic, state/provincial, and national government agencies to form or allow UAS to be used more widely in these missions.  Unmanned aircraft can augment manned SAR assets to provide a wider range of coverage and venture into situations that may be too hazardous and constricting for manned aircraft.  One example is Texas EquuSearch, a privately operated group that conducts search and rescue operations for missing persons.  UAS have been deployed on previous operations, which have brought the group in conflict with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).  Both Texas EquuSearch and the FAA have cited safety as the primary motivation for their actions (AP Staff, 2014).  Competitions such as those held by ARCAA may assist in gaining more support and acceptance of UAS in SAR operations.

References:

Associated Press (AP) Staff.  (2014, July 18).  Texas Search Group to Resume Using Drones Despite FAA Admonition.  The Dallas Morning News.  Retrieved from http://www.dallasnews.com/news/state/headlines/20140718-texas-search-group-to-resume-using-drones-despite-faa-admonition.ece

Roberts, J., Frousheger, D., Williams, B., Campbell, D., & Walker, R.  (2015, December 18).  How the UAV Outback Challenge Was Finally Won.  IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine.  Retrieved from https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5JgqjkRDqw8RG1Ibjg5RkRxbjA/view

UAV Challenge Staff.  (2016).  Medical Express FAQ [Fact Sheet].  Retrieved from https://uavchallenge.org/medical-express/medical-express-faq/

ASCI 637, Assignment 2.3, FAA Airworthiness Certification for UAS

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Airworthiness Certification for UAS    

     The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requires airworthiness certification to ensure appropriate safety standards in an aircraft’s design.  An FAA type design approval indicates that a safety evaluation of an aircraft’s design and its system has been conducted in accordance with applicable airworthiness regulations.  This certification process is more rigorous than simply determining that an aircraft is airworthy (FAA, 2013, p. 25).  FAA certification is vital to the future integration of UAS operations in the National Airspace System (NAS).

     The FAA airworthiness certification covers all safety aspects of an aircraft’s design.  The development of a sense-and-avoid (SAA) system for UAS to help maintain safe separation from other air traffic has received a significant amount of media attention.  However, SAA is only one aspect of the overall safety features of an unmanned aircraft.  Programs such as the FAA’s NextGen, command, control, and communication (C3) links, and C3 frequency management will all be significant factors in the future of these aircraft in the NAS.  A UAS will most likely have met all the criteria to safely operate in the NAS and demonstrated systems, such as SAA and Automated Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) compliance, to attain FAA airworthiness certification (Warwick, 2014).

     U.S. Congress initially set September 2015 as a goal for integration of UAS into NAS operations.  In 2014, the FAA outlined a plan for phased implementation approach to achieve this goal over the course of five years.  Disputes over the definition of UAS integration between the FAA and Department of Transportation inspectors added administrative delays to the process.  A significant point of contention was safe versus full integration (Warwick, 2014).  To date, the FAA has set regulations for recreational flight, exceptions for commercial use, and plans for UAS pilot certification (FAA, 2016).

     Potential commercial UAS operators have been waiting for the FAA to finalize unmanned aircraft regulations to initiate their aerial operations.  Future operators agree that safety and security of flight operation is vital for UAS integration into NAS operations.  SAA systems to de-conflict with other air traffic and secure C3 links to prevent unauthorized control inputs are some of the technological challenges that must be met (Business Aviation Insider Staff, 2016).  The development of these technologies will be as important as the FAA finalizing UAS regulations.  Completion of these steps will guide criteria for FAA airworthiness certifications.

References:

Business Aviation Insider Staff.  (2016, February 1).  Integrating UAS Into Business Aviation Operations.  National Business Aviation Association.  Retrieved from https://www.nbaa.org/ops/uas/20160201-integrating-uas-into-business-aviation-operations.php

Federal Aviation Administration.  (2016).  Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Frequently Asked Questions/Help [Fact Sheet].  Retrieved from https://www.faa.gov/uas/faqs/#krp

Federal Aviation Administration.  (2013).  Integration of Civil Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) in the National Airspace System (NAS) Roadmap (FAA 2012-AJG-502).  Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Warwick, G.  (2014, July 3).  FAA Preparing Phased Integration Of UAS Over Five Years.  Aviation Week.  Retrieved from http://aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/faa-preparing-phased-integration-uas-over-five-years

ASCI 637, Assignment 1.5, UAS Strengths and Weaknesses

     The General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper unmanned aerial system (UAS) is used primarily in intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) missions by the U.S Air Force (USAF).  The aircraft’s ISR capabilities have also prompted the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) to procure the UAS to patrol the borders of the continental U.S.  The Reaper is fully capable of performing the military and civic missions.  However, the aircraft’s design also inherently brings strengths and weaknesses to its missions.

     The MQ-9 is well suited to perform military ISR missions.  The aircraft has a maximum speed of 240 knots, a service ceiling of 50,000 feet, and an endurance of 27 hours.  The payload is highly modular and available sensors include electro-optical imaging systems, multi-mode ground and maritime radars, electronic support measures, and laser designators (General Atomics, 2016).  These features provide a highly capable high altitude, long endurance (HALE) ISR asset to support military forces.  However, the Reaper was designed primarily for carrying aloft a sizeable sensor payload for long durations.  The relatively slow top speed is a shortcoming of the UAS.  The high service ceiling provides a good vantage point to mitigate the speed deficiency.  However, mission planning must account for the time needed for the aircraft to climb to that altitude.

     The CBP has acquired MQ-9s for patrol and ISR missions primarily along the southern frontier of the U.S.  The aircraft’s endurance, operating altitude, and sensor suite provide useful capabilities for border ISR missions (Booth, 2011).  However, the Reaper was also designed to carry munitions aloft.  The airframe and powerplant of the UAS was designed for this task and is probably far more than what is required for CBP’s mission.  Avionics such as the laser designator is unnecessary since the CBP aircraft are unarmed.  CBP UAS pilots also require significant training to operate the MQ-9.  As the primary and most experienced operators of this platform, USAF units and defense contractors have furnished the CBP’s instruction (Gunderson, 2015).

     A request for proposal for a UAS optimized for CBP’s specific ISR requirements would probably yield a smaller and easier to operate platform.  A smaller UAS, such as the Boeing/Insitu ScanEagle, would also have a much smaller logistical footprint.  The Reaper requires an airfield while the ScanEagle uses a catapult and arresting system for recovery (Insitu, 2016).  CBP Reaper operations are restricted at certain airfields due to runway approaches that pass over populated areas (Booth, 2011).  The capability to operate from mobile locations versus fixed airfields also reduces vulnerability to human intelligence sources watching for CBP operations.  A less complicated and easier to fly UAS would also reduce the time and expenses required for CBP pilots’ training and travel.

     A single platform capable of both the military and civil ISR missions would be ideal.   However, the former requires the carriage and delivery of munitions while the latter does not.  These requirements would produce a UAS design that is fitting for one mission while being “overkill” for the other mission.  One agency would be funding features that are unnecessary to its mission.  A cost benefit analysis would be necessary to determine whether resources are best allocated to developing a single platform for both military and civil missions or developing two separate UAS to perform each agency’s mission.

References:

Booth, W.  (2011, December 21).  More Predator Drones Fly U.S.-Mexico Border.  Washington Post.  Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/more-predator-drones-fly-us-mexico-border/2011/12/01/gIQANSZz8O_story.html

General Atomics.  (2016).  Predator B RPA [Fact Sheet].  Retrieved from http://www.ga-asi.com/predator-b

Gunderson, D.  (2015, February 19).  Drone Patrol: Unmanned Craft Find Key Role in U.S. Border Security.  Minnesota Public Radio News.  Retrieved from https://www.mprnews.org/story/2015/02/19/predator-drone

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