| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| FAA Under Pressure To Open Us Skies To Drones |
| 2010-06-14 |
| The Federal Aviation Administration has been asked to issue flying rights for a range of pilotless planes to carry out civilian and law-enforcement functions but has been hesitant to act. Officials are worried that they might plow into airliners, cargo planes and corporate jets that zoom around at high altitudes, or helicopters and hot air balloons that fly as low as a few hundred feet off the ground. On top of that, these pilotless aircraft come in a variety of sizes. Some are as big as a small airliner, others the size of a backpack. The tiniest are small enough to fly through a house window. The obvious risks have not deterred the civilian demand for pilotless planes. Tornado researchers want to send them into storms to gather data. Energy companies want to use them to monitor pipelines. State police hope to send them up to capture images of speeding cars' license plates. Local police envision using them to track fleeing suspects. |
| Posted by:BrerRabbit |
| #7 Reminds me of a proposal to use UAVs for shark patrol off the beaches of Perth, Western Australia. When you figure out the cost and personnel involved two 19 year olds in an old 172 is way cheaper. |
| Posted by: Aussie Mike 2010-06-14 18:43 |
| #6 Drones or RPV's that are programed or remotely piloted. Their sensors are such that they are like looking through a straw (OK, toilet paper tube) with little or no situational awareness and a certain amount of time lag on the controls. That's why most UAV losses are mechanical failure and/or pilot loss of control during emergencies or landing. In combat zones there is strict traffic separation between everything in the air; fast, slow, high and low movers, manned and unmanned. Most of the US is not under radar control, especially low altitude, even in fairly dense population areas. With existing systems eventually there WOULD be a collision with a manned aircraft. |
| Posted by: tipover 2010-06-14 16:41 |
| #5 Procopius2k: Apples and oranges. No motorized pilot will go anywhere near a hot air balloon festival, so for the duration of the event, Albuquerque, for example, has little or no low altitude air traffic other than balloons. N.B.: collision avoidance doesn't work with hot air balloons. BTW, if you want to attend the Albuquerque festival, I know a great place to stay where the hosts are also balloonists. I'd also like to add that this isn't restricted to just the civilian world. The USAF and the US Army have been wrangling with each other for years over UAVs in each other's airspace. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2010-06-14 13:33 |
| #4 I don't see where our border is a zone we really NEED to use drones - those are much more vital where we can't afford to have a conventional aircraft downed and the pilot captured. For border work just install some weapons & observation pod mounting points on a Cessna and offer free flight hours and you'll get all the volunteers you can handle. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2010-06-14 12:48 |
| #3 my real hang up is this is just another way for law enforcement too spy on us. |
| Posted by: chris 2010-06-14 12:31 |
| #2 Imagine an airspace sharing its volume with not only civilian passenger and cargo traffic of a major metro area, but also placing hundreds of craft that have limited means to react quickly to that on coming traffic. Done every year. Not a single record of collision yet. So, what's the real hang up? |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2010-06-14 11:12 |
| #1 Those folks who want drones flying around our airspace have never seen, or heard, a pilot when he is truly pissed off. I remember a while back when someone proposed building a football stadium at the end of a major runway at Sky Harbor. Their logic was that "No problem, planes will just have to take off at 15 more degrees angle to avoid it!" The local talk radio station was suddenly deluged by phone calls from irate pilots. They were very glad they had a 15 second tape delay, because what the pilots were screaming was so peppered with obscenities that it sounded like a longshoreman who had just hit his gouty toe with a hammer. Needless to say, the FAA told the stadium builders not only "no", but "Hell no!" I know the airspace around here is already crowded as blue blazes with normal civilian and military traffic. It is also electronic band crowded, so control systems for drones would be sketchy as well. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2010-06-14 11:06 |