It's a Bee; It's an Amphibian, It's a Drone!

One of the topics discussed in this week’s readings was the concept of using micro flying robots and biologically inspired UAS in the future applications. Micro UAS can perform a variety of missions and be used in civilian and military applications. This blog post focuses on these micro flying robots, which are created to resemble insects and even mimic the behaviors of the bugs.

In June 2016, the National Science Foundations published an article “The flight of the RoboBee,” which describes the amazing capabilities of these micro-UAVs, their benefits, and possible applications (Dubrow, 2016). Since then, the micro-UAV development has received much attention due to considerable advances in design and technology. The micro-UAV research aims to create autonomous robotic insects capable of sustained and autonomous flight.

One of the primary applications for the RoboBees is performing crop pollination- the job usually accomplished by the honeybees. Honeybees alone contribute more than $15 billion in value to U.S. crops each year (Spector, 2014). Recently, the honey bee population has been drastically declining due to several factors, such as parasites, disease, and pesticides. If the number of honey bees continues to decline at such an alarming rate, the agricultural sector will feel the negative impacts such as the declining crop volumes. Although the RoboBees technology is still in its development stage, the researchers believe that in less than 10 years these micro-UAVs could artificially pollinate the crops.

Agricultural uses are not the only job micro- UAVs can perform. They are also able to assist in intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) missions or provide support in remote communications. After natural disasters, the micro-UAVs can assist in search and rescue mission. They can also perform traffic monitoring and law enforcement missions. A swarm of the RoboBees can conduct environmental research, collect data about air contamination (Langston, 2016). However, the flight time of aerial robots is restricted by the weight of their onboard power system and the lifetime of their miniature mechanical components. Additionally, the endurance of current micro-UAS decreases substantially as vehicle scale reduces.

The RoboBees have their strength in numbers. Most of the RoboBees applications will require swarms of thousands of the micro-UAVs working together, autonomously coordinating their operations without relying on a leader- or a “mother-bee.” Large swarm will ensure that the mission will be accomplished even if a large number of single RoboBees fail or fly to recharge themselves. As we can see, the micro-UAV applications are quite diverse.

Now, let’s focus on design and some of the technological features of the RoboBees. The inspiration to create these micro-UAVs came from nature. Insects have the amazing ability to take off, navigate, communicate, and perform precise maneuvers despite their small bodies and tiny brains.

The RoboBee is close to the size of a real bee and weighs only 84 milligrams. Currently, these UAVs are being flown with the use of a tether; however, researchers are working on some advanced control and power solutions for these vehicles. To create these micro flying robots, the researchers had to experiment with compact power storage, ultra-low power computing, artificial muscles, and bio-inspired sensors (Spector, 2014).

The RoboBee is an aerial system, that consists of three main parts: the vehicle, the brain, and the colony (Spector, 2014). The vehicle body is designed to be autonomously flown by using “artificial muscles” made out of materials that contract when a voltage is applied. The UAV should be compact and carry its own power source and all the required sensors.  The “brain” of the micro-UAS is comprised of sensors and control electronics that imitate the eyes and antennae of a bee and can sense and respond to the environment, avoid obstacles and perform agile maneuvering. The Colony component of the system is concerned with managing and coordinating the performance of the independent UAS as a swarm to effectively complete the required mission (Wyss Institute, n.d.).

Figure 1. RoboBee. Adapted from “Tiny flying robots are being built to pollinate crops instead of real bees”, by D. Spector, 2014. Copyright by Wyss Institute.

One of the most challenging aspects of the RoboBee is its power system design.  Many applications for these UAVs would require the RoboBees to perform extended endurance operations. However, one of the disadvantages of a smaller size of the vehicles is their inability to carry enough power for the mission. To give the robot-insects longer endurance, the researchers came up with breakthrough solution- the use perching technique to save energy. This energy conservation behavior is found in other insects, birds, and bats. In the research article “Perching and takeoff of a robotic insect on overhangs using switchable electrostatic adhesion,” by Graule et al., (2016), the researchers incorporated electrostatic adhesion technique — the same principle that causes a static-charged balloon to stick to a wall (Graule et al., 2016) By employing the perching technique, the RoboBee will use about 1000 times less power than during hovering. It will help extend mission time without the need for larger battery incorporation (Burrows, 2016).

Figure 2. RoboBee Perched on the leaf. Adapted from “RoboBees can perch to save energy”, by L. Burrows, L, 2016, Harvard Gazette. Copyright by Wyss Institute.

Figure 3. Perching technique of the RoboBee. Adapted from “Perching and takeoff of a robotic insect on overhangs using switchable electrostatic adhesion,” by M. Graule et al., 2016. Copyright by 2016 Science.  

The perching construction consists of an electrode patch and a foam base that absorbs shock. This modification allows the robot to stick to almost any surface when the electrode patch is supplied with a charge. When the UAV is ready to take off again, the electrical charge is turned off.

Researchers estimate that in the next ten years, the RoboBees will be able to carry out everyday operations. To achieve this goal, they plan to equip these vehicles with new capabilities. The latest generation of micro-bees can also swim. In 2017 the scientists introduced a new and evolved RoboBee which is capable of amphibious operations. In the article “A biologically inspired, flapping-wing, hybrid aerial-aquatic microrobot,” Chang et al., (2017) present the design and operation of micro UAS that is capable of flying, swimming, and transitioning between air and water. The RoboBee uses its wings to swim underwater. When the robot breaks the water surface, the electrolytic plates produce oxyhydrogen from the surrounding water that is collected by a buoyancy compartment. This buoyancy allows the robot to push itself out of the water. A miniature sparker ignites the oxyhydrogen, allowing the UAS to take off from the water surface (Chang et al., 2017).  Future improvement for these microrobots also includes the incorporation of microlaser sensors to aid the bees with better environmental sensing and obstacle avoidance.

The RoboBee project is not only created the amazing micro-UAS, but it also developed new technologies which can be used in other areas. For example, several of the RoboBees principal investigators are now participating in a DARPA-sponsored venture making new surgical tools based on the microfabrication technologies developed in the RoboBees project.

References

Burrows, L. (2016, May 19). RoboBees can perch to save energy. Harvard Gazette. Retrieved from http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2016/05/robobees-can-perch-to-save-energy/

Chang, Y., Wang, H., Helbling, E., Jafferis, N., & Zufferey, R. (2017). A biologically inspired, flapping-wing, hybrid aerial-aquatic microrobot. Science Robotics, 2. https://doi.org/10.1126/scirobotics.aao5619

Dubrow, A. (2016). Flight of the RoboBee. Retrieved from https://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=138802

Graule, M., Chirarattanon, P., Fuller, S., Jeffereis, N., Ma, K., Spenko, M., ... Wood, R. (2016). Perching and takeoff of a robotic insect on overhangs using switchable electrostatic adhesion. Science, 352, 978-982. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf1092

Langston, J. (2016). Using static electricity, insect-sized flying robots can land and stick to surfaces. Retrieved from http://www.washington.edu/news/2016/05/19/using-static-electricity-insect-sized-flying-robots-can-land-and-stick-to-surfaces/

Spector, D. (2014). Tiny flying robots are being built to pollinate crops instead of real bees. Retrieved from http://www.businessinsider.com/harvard-robobees-closer-to-pollinating-crops-2014-6

Wyss Institute. (n.d.). Autonomous flying micro robots (RoboBees). Retrieved from http://wyss.harvard.edu/viewpage/457

Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) incorporation into the National Aerospace System: Sense-and avoid challenges.

One of the major topics in unmanned vehicles operations is the lack of effective sense-and-avoid (SAA) capabilities of the UAS (Oliver, 2016). A key challenge within the SAA problem is to reliably and automatically detect potential midair aircraft collisions (Bratanov, Mejias, & Ford, 2017).  The ability of the UAS to sense and avoid surrounding traffic must be fully addressed before the UAS can be integrated into the National Aerospace System. As we know, most manned aircraft carry advanced traffic collision avoidance technologies (Federal Aviation Administration [FAA], n.d.). However, UAS are not currently required to incorporate any sense-and-avoid equipment. Piloted aircraft are required to maintain a visual scan for traffic at all times. However, UAS may be difficult to detect due to their small size. Detection is even more difficult in poor meteorological conditions. Since there is no pilot directly at the controls of the UAS, visual traffic detection may be inadequate due to the limited field of view, control signal latency, and other technological constraints. During manned aircraft operations, the pilots are directly responsible to visually detect, avoid, and maintain a safe distance from the surrounding traffic (Consiglio, Chamberlain, Munos, & Hoffler, 2012). Manned aircraft employ a variety of methods for traffic separation. Pilots rely on visual cues, air traffic control (ATC) advisories, and other sensory information available in the cockpit.

The FAA has restricted UAS operations below 400 feet above ground level (AGL), and within the line of sight of the pilot, and in fair meteorological conditions (FAA, 2016). These limitations may help in separating UAS from piloted aircraft to some degree. Nevertheless, these restrictions do not provide the acceptable level of safety. Eventually, UAS missions will have to be extended to altitudes beyond 400 feet AGL and UAS will be operating alongside piloted aircraft in all airspace segments.

The lack of UAS SAA capability and its adverse effects on aviation safety has been a subject of research. The first SAA alternative offered by scholars is a ground-based SAA (GBSAA). This method employs the UAS pilot housed in the ground control station (GCS) as the primary authority for detection, evaluation, and execution of the traffic avoidance maneuvers. The traffic information would be displayed on the screen in the GCS. The UAS pilot will also rely on ATC traffic advisories and alerts and, if necessary, follow the ATC recommendations to avoid the surrounding traffic.

The second alternative action for SAA problem mitigation is to incorporate traffic detecting and avoidance technology directly onboard of the UAS. There are a variety of SAA sensor options available. SAA sensors can be grouped into two categories: cooperative and non-cooperative technologies (Albaker & Rahim, 2011). Cooperative sensors require the installation of transponder equipment on board the aircraft to broadcast its position information and interrogate surrounding traffic (Asmat et al., n.d.). Cooperative sensors will only function if all participating aircraft are equipped with transponders (Fasano, Accardo, Tirri, Moccia, & DeLellis, 2015). On the other hand, non-cooperative sensors are capable to detect airborne targets autonomously, regardless of whether the intruder aircraft carry any SAA equipment or regardless of transponder installation (Asmat et al., n.d.).

A couple examples of cooperative technologies are the Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) and the Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS). ADS-B and is a part of the NexGen ATC system (Zimmerman, 2013).

Figure 1. ADS-B diagram. ADS-B includes ground stations, GPS, and aircraft avionics. Adapted from “ADS-B 101: What is it and why you should care,” by J. Zimmerman, 2013. Copyright 2013 by J. Zimmerman.

Figure 2. TCAS Version 7.1 with smart reversion logic allows pilot to properly select the corrective maneuver, avoid overcorrection, and reverses resolution advisories in accordance with intruder aircraft maneuvering. Adapted from “TCAS II Version 7.1,.” by Eurocontrol, 2014. Copyright 2014 by Eurocontrol.

Another option is to use non-cooperative sensors for UAS SAA. Many researchers have focused more on non-cooperative sensors of the active and passive type as they can provide better detection of the non-cooperative traffic (McClellan, Kang, & Woosely, 2017). There are a variety of technologies currently available, each with its specific advantages and drawbacks (Yu & Zhang, 2015). The main advantage of non-cooperative sensors is their ability to detect the intruder regardless of what equipment is installed on the other aircraft. Therefore, non-cooperative technology is useful if other traffic does not have a transponder or the ADS-B equipment. This sensor category includes the following: thermal, electro-optic/infrared (EO/IR), acoustic, laser obstacle avoidance system (LOAM), millimeter wave radar (MMW), and synthetic aperture radar (SAR).

Sensor fusion is another approach, which combines cooperative and non-cooperative technologies to compensate for limitations of the sensing systems. The research and development in sensors fusion are however still in its initial stages. Using both cooperative and non-cooperative airborne sensor in combination with ground-based traffic surveillance will increase the UAS SAA capability and, therefore, raise the levels of operational safety. Researchers have need testing and suggesting various sensor combinations in different SAA scenarios and evaluating the capabilities of various technology.

Another technological challenge in SAA is to meet the size, weight, and power (SWaP) limitations of UAS and especially small-UAS while still maintaining the needed sensing capability. Some researchers propose the use of miniaturized airborne radar for automated traffic detection and avoidance (Roberts, 2017).

SAA capability should become a major prerequisite for UAS operations in the NAS. SAA capability should be considered a minimum performance requirement for unmanned aircraft. It is important to test the SAA algorithms for different flight scenarios. For example, different aircraft convergence situation should be tested, such as head-on approach, climbing from below, or descending from above. It would be advantageous to perform SAA testing in the various weather conditions. For instance, daylight visual flight rules (VFR) and night VFR. Simulation and actual flight testing should be conducted with different UAS groups to determine that the SAA system meets the required levels of safety (Kuchar, n.d.).

UAS SAA is an overwhelming problem being discussed among aviation regulatory and safety agencies. UAS proliferation is rapidly increasing in the civilian sector, and it is imperative to address a means to incorporate SSA for safe UAS operation. Standardized equipment mandates, UAS certification, and pilot training for SAA scenarios should be established and enforced. Proper standards should be set to assure that UAS collision avoidance performance equals to that of the manned aircraft collision avoidance capabilities. The FAA should revise some of the regulatory documentation to include proper amendments for UAS operations. 

UAS integration into the NAS should not compromise safety or efficiency of the airspace operations. UAS will have to adapt to the standards and procedure currently employed in the NAS. However, it is probable that the current rules and regulations for manned aircraft will have to be adjusted to include the new UAS members. Only then we will be able to take a full advantage of the benefits UAS offer. 

References

Albaker, B. M., & Rahim, N. A. (2011). A conceptual framework and a review of conflict sensing, detection, awareness and escape maneuvering methods for UAVs. Retrieved from UMPEDAC Research Centre, Faculty of Engineering, University of Malaya: http://www.intechopen.com/books/aeronautics-and-astronautics/a-conceptual-framework-and-a-review-of-conflict-sensing-detection-awareness-and-escape-maneuvering-m

Asmat, J., Rhodes, B., Umansky, J., Villlavicencio, C., Yunas, A., Donohue, G., & Lacher, A. (n.d.). UAS safety: unmanned aerial collision avoidance system. Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?arnumber=4055110

Bratanov, D., Mejias, L., & Ford, J. (2017). A vision-based sense-and-avoid system tested on a ScanEagle UAV. International Conference on UAS. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICUAS.2017.7991302

Eurocontrol. (2014). TCAS II Version 7.1. Retrieved from http://www.eurocontrol.int/articles/tcas-ii-version-71

Federal Aviation Administration. (2016). Summary of small unmanned aircraft rule (part 107). Retrieved from http://www.faa.gov/uas/media/Part_107_Summary.pdf

Federal Aviation Administration. (n.d.). 14 CFR 91.227 - Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) Out equipment performance requirements. Retrieved from https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/91.227

Kuchar, J. K. (n.d.). Safety analysis methodology for unmanned aerial vehicle (UAVs) collision avoidance systems. Retrieved from Massachusetts Institute of Technology: http://www.ll.mit.edu/mission/aviation/publications/publication-files/ms-papers/Kuchar_2005_ATM_MS-19102_WW-18698.pdf

McClellan, H., Kang, K., & Woosely, C. (2017). Small aircraft flight encounters database for UAS sense and avoid.  American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1-11. Retrieved from https://arc-aiaa-org.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/doi/pdf/10.2514/6.2017-1152

Oliver, J. (2016). Routine unmanned aircraft operations in the National Aerospace System. Benefits and challenges. Retrieved from https://trid.trb.org/view/1426216

Roberts, A. (2017). Improvements, algorithms and a simulation model for a compact Phased-Array Radar for UAS Sense and Avoid. Scholars Archive. Retrieved from https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/6314/

Zimmerman, J. (2013). ADS-B 101: What is it and why you should care. Retrieved from http://airfactsjournal.com/2013/01/ads-b-101-what-it-is-and-why-you-should-care/ads-b-diagram/

Case Analysis Effectiveness

The case analysis project is a great assignment, that allowed me to formulate, organize, and deliver some suggestions on some important issues pertaining to the unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) operations. In my opinion, the case analysis paper presented a great approach to problem solving. It allowed me to analyze the problem, recommend alternate strategies, and select the most appropriate actions to mitigate the selected issue. The precise and direct problem statement allowed me to focus on a specific problem, such as UAS sense-and-avoid capability, without “overlapping” into other UAS issues. Consequently, the entire research project was dedicated to a particular problem. It allowed me to come up with concise alternative solutions to a particular issue. I found it helpful to review some examples of the problem statements online (Decker, n.d.).

The significance of the issue chapter helped me deliver an in-depth overview of the UAS sense-and-avoid issues. It allowed me to research the historical perspective of SAA capabilities of manned aircraft and apply this information to UAS operations. During my work on this chapter of the case analysis, I have also reviewed existing regulations pertaining to the UAS and specifically to sense-and-avoid capabilities.

The chapter on alternative actions allowed me to concisely select two appropriate migration strategies and describe their advantages and drawbacks. This helped me seamlessly flow into the formulation of recommendations for sense-and-avoid problem mitigation. I think, that the fact that we could be creative in our recommendations and express every idea we have in this chapter, was a great approach. It is very similar to “brain storming” used in problem solving. The ideas were not restricted by any existing limitations, which made it easier to express them. Of course, some of the recommendations may not be feasible to implement right away based on the current regulations and the current state of technology. However, it is possible that in the near future the opportunity to use some of these ideas will arise.

In my opinion, the case analysis approach would be beneficial in my current profession. First, as a pilot and aviation department manager, I frequently encounter situations when decisions have to be made in a timely manner. Often, we have a time constraints, budget constraints, regulatory constraints, which limit the possible decisions that can be made. However, we can always come up with several alternative courses of action, evaluate each advantage and drawback of these actions and elect the best approach.

I think this class was very informative and well structured. It presented us with a lot of valuable and current information on unmanned aerial systems. It not only included some of the technological, operational, and application aspects of the UAS, but also involved ethical, legal, and regulatory aspects as well. By providing peer reviews to other classmates’ posts, we also had an opportunity to learn and collaborate on different subjects. I think this interaction aspect of the class was very beneficial. Case analysis peer reviews were also quite beneficial. Since it allowed the students to exchange ideas and provide some recommendations for each other work.

In my personal opinion, writing and posting my discussions and blog posts as well as case analysis assignments before reading my classmates posts gave me a chance to really focus on forming my own ideas and solutions. However, peer reviews gave us an opportunity to expand our knowledge and see different outlooks on the same topics or issues.

Overall, I really enjoyed this class and the collaboration with our professor and classmates. Looking forward to the new semester. Good luck to all of you in your future endeavors.

Respectfully,

Elena

References

Decker, G. (n.d.). Formulating problem statement. Retrieved from http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/c/v/cvm115/proposal/formulating_problem_statements.htm

Request for Proposal

Natural disasters strike unexpectedly, often taking countless lives and causing significant economic impact on the affected areas. Time is a critical factor when it comes to the emergency recovery missions. Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) applications during disaster recovery missions offer many valuable advantages for the emergency personnel. UAS has been utilized in several search and rescue missions during hurricane recovery efforts (Nitti, 2011). The National Astronautics and Space Administration (NASA) together with National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) employed a Global Hawk UAS to collect data on hurricane Matthew, which recently affected the east coast of the United States (Vanian, 2016). The Ikhana UAS was deployed during wildfires in California. It was collecting temperature data and mapping fire locations. This UAS transmitted fire spot information to multiagency management centers and emergency workers on the ground helping the firefighting operations (National Astronautics and Space Administration [NASA], 2010).

UAS can also serve as a communication relay or wireless “hot spots” in case of communication infrastructure damage in the area. In fact, Verizon has tested this application utilizing a UAS as a mobile hot spot for its cell phone network. This capability can help first responders communicate and have access to online resources. This technology is even more valuable in remote locations where the wireless is damaged or destroyed or even in areas that currently have wireless service. (Hamblen, 2016).

For this paper the author selected the UAS that can be used in hurricane recovery missions. First, let’s discuss some of the baseline and derived requirements for this type of UAS. The time line for design, development, testing, and deployment of this UAS would be approximately one year. The vehicle platform should be small enough to be easily transported to the disaster area and launched on the moment’s notice. It will require high definition still camera and video sensors to provide the recovery workers with complete picture of the area. The sensory payload would also include a thermal sensor and a night vision sensor to aid in location of stranded persons during poor visibility and low light operations. The UAS should be capable of providing imagery of the area supplemented with the GPS location tags for quick position reference. The vehicle should be able to withstand moderate wind gusts since it may need to be deployed immediately after storm passage. Therefore, the base and derivative requirements will include the following parameters:

1.     Air vehicle element shall be able to house all required systems, payload equipment, and provide sound aerodynamic flight capabilities.

1.1  The UAS shall be able to operate at altitudes of 300 feet above ground level.

1.2  The UAS shall be able to offer one-hour endurance.

1.3  The UAS shall be able to cover a range of 3 nautical miles.

1.4  The UAS shall be able to hover.

1.5  The UAS shall be hand launched.

1.6  The UAS shall be able to perform landing without requiring runway or approved landing area.

1.7  The UAS shall have a sufficient physical dimension to incorporate all required payload equipment.

1.8  The UAS shall be equipped with sufficient power system to sustain flight operations and support payload equipment.

1.9       The UAS shall be able to operate during wind speeds of 30 miles per hour.

1.10         The UAS shall be able to withstand wind gusts up to 30 miles per hour.

1.11         The UAS shall be able to be prepared for launch within 20 minutes.

1.12         The UAS shall feature a robust design for operations in the adverse weather condition.

1.13         The UAS shall have a waterproof design to protect the vehicle and sensors from the elements during operations in precipitations.

1.14         The UAS shall incorporate both autonomous and manual operational capabilities.

2.               Payload element. Payload sensors shall provide means for an area inspection and for victim location.

2.1 The Payload shall be capable of color motion video recording up to 300 feet.

2.2 The Payload shall incorporate an infrared (IR) sensor.

2.3 The Payload shall incorporate a thermal sensor.

2.4 The Payload shall utilize the main power system of the UAS.

2.5 The Payload shall be able to communicate acquired data via datalink to the ground control station (GCS) in real time.

 3. The communication (data-link) shall provide a robust connection between the UAS and the GCS. It shall enable The UAS to receive commands from the GCS and downlink sensory data and UAS status to the operator.

 3.1 It shall incorporate lost- link contingency procedures.

3.2 It shall be able to provide uninterrupted communication within a 3 miles’ radius.

3.3 It shall provide a means of real-time video transmission to the GCS.

3.4 It shall provide a means of still pictures transmissions to the GCS.

3.5 I shall provide real-time vehicle telemetry and “health” status.

3.6 It shall be powered by the UAS power system.

3.7 I shall accommodate a means of redundancy for the C3 systems.

Now that base and derived requirements are defined, it is important to discuss some of the testing requirements that can be used to validate and verify that base parameters have been met (Torun, 1999).

1.     Testing requirements.

1.1  Vehicle element

1.1.2 Test aerodynamic capabilities of the UAS using wind tunnel testing.

1.1.3 Test wind tolerance, gust tolerance during all cruise, takeoff, and landing conditions in the wind tunnel.

1.1.4 Test if the platform is waterproof using various precipitation levels.

1.1.5 Test the take-off and landing capabilities.

1.1.6 Test the hover/ orbiting capabilities of the vehicle.

1.1.7 Test that the vehicle platform will have sufficient space for all sensor payload and subsystems by physically incorporating each system into the vehicle.

1.1.8 Ensure proper center of gravity location.

1.1.9 Conduct manual flight testing in a real- world scenarios.

1.1.10 Conduct automated flight testing.

1.2 Payload

1.2.1 Bench test payload equipment to determine if the UAS power system will provide sufficient power for the payload operation.

1.2.2 Test various commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) sensor options available and compare their size, weight, and power requirements.

1.2.3 Test the GPS data tags accuracy using predetermined locations on the ground.

1.2.4. Test the payload interoperability with C2 and the data-link subsystems.

1.3 Communications (data-link).

1.3.1 Test the communication range of the UAS in different geophysical setting, such as flat terrain, mountainous areas, hilly areas to determine how the topography will affect communications.

1.3.2 Assess lost-link procedures and vehicle performance during lost communication scenarios.

1.3.3 Test functionality of the redundant communication channels.

1.3.4 Test the procedure for switching to the redundant means of communication.

1.3.5 Test data uplink channel volume and speed of communications.

1.3.6 Test down-link channel volume of speed of communications.

1.3.7 Test if communication subsystem has sufficient power provided from the vehicle element.

Now, that testing requirements have been established, it is important to note, that the UAS test site may need to be reserved well in advance to enable on-time testing and ensure seamless transition between design, development, and testing phases of the project (Austin, 2010). It is important to develop a time line for the design project, that will include various stages of the design and the time allocated for each phase (Figure 1). It is advantageous to maintain a detailed record of any change made during the design process (Gurd, 2013). Traceability is extremely important, since even a minor change in any of the UAS sub-systems may affect other system design and may compromise the entire project (Austin, 2010). Also, it is imperative to assign specific tasks to each personnel to maintain accountability.  Each person must also define a level of authority thought the entire project to ensure a timely completion

Figure 1. The UAS project planner and timeline. This chart was created using a Microsoft Excel Gantt Chart.

Another important step is the UAS certification.  The appropriate regulatory agencies, such as the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) should be contacted in the early stages of the UAS design. The assigned UAS company representative shall maintain close communication with the Agency in order to receive any feedback and incorporate any required changes into the design process to help speed up the certification process after project completion (Austin, 2010).

Since hurricane recovery missions are never standard, the UAS platform shall have a modular design that allows it to incorporate interchangeable payloads (Torun, 1999). It is advisable to use COTS products to meet this requirement. COTS products can present a significant advantage for designers especially in the selection of sensors and camera equipment. COTS will save time on development, and less expensive than customized payload design. Another advantage of modular design and the use of COTS systems is the possibility of future upgrades and further customization. As technology progresses and sensor capabilities improve, new payloads may be incorporated in the existing UAS platform.

As we can see, the UAS design process is a complex task, which requires careful planning, constant control, continuous adaptation to changes, and rigorous testing. After the UAS is built, tested, certified, and released to the customer, it will need to be supported, maintained, and possibly upgraded to maintain its efficiency, reliability, and safety. By carefully outlining the base and derivative requirements, including accountability, traceability and adhering to the timeline, the UAS project will be successful and produce a marketable product.

References

Austin, R. (2010). Unmanned aircraft systems. UAVS design, development, and deployment. West Essex, United Kindgom: John Wiley & Sons.

Gurd, A. (2013). Managing your requirements 101 – A refresher. Part 4: what is traceability? Retrieved from https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/community/blogs/requirementsmanagement/entry/managing_your_requirements_101_a_refresher_part_4_what_is_traceability7?lang=en

Hamblen, M. (2016). Drones could help in disasters like hurricane Matthew. Retrieved from http://www.computerworld.com/article/3128357/emerging-technology/drones-could-help-with-disasters-like-hurricane-matthew.html

National Astronautics and Space Administration. (2010). NASA’s Ikhana aircraft helps fight 1,000+ California fires. Retrieved from http://www.nasa.gov/offices/ipp/centers/dfrc/news_events/SS-Ikhana.html#.V_5SW4WcFPZ

Nitti, K. (2011). Unmanned aircraft offer new tools for the emergency response arsenal. Retrieved from http://www.emergencymgmt.com/disaster/Unmanned-Aircraft-Emergency-Response-032411.html

Torun, E. (1999). UAS requirements and design considerations. Retrieved from Turkish land forces command: http://ftp.rta.nato.int/public//PubFulltext/RTO/MP/RTO-MP-044///MP-044-B04.pdf

Vanian, J. (2016). NASA is flying a huge drone over hurricane Mathew. Retrieved from http://fortune.com/2016/10/07/nasa-drone-hurricane-matthew/

UAS law enforcement surveillance missions

Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) have been employed in a diversity of applications. Mission requirements and vehicle’s operational environment will largely influence the UAS design, payload, and flight envelope parameters. For the purpose of this paper, the author has selected the law enforcement surveillance applications of UAS. This research will identify the mission parameters, requirements, and challenges. It will also point out some legal and ethical concerns regarding UAS use for law enforcement. It will describe several suitable platforms and discuss their specific features that make them particularly advantageous for law enforcement missions.

Many law enforcement agencies use UAS on a daily basis. They are used in many missions to include tactical operations, criminal pursuit and crowd control. Their use has been expanded to include some non-conventional missions such as forensics and traffic management and also the more conventional rolls in search and rescue, and emergency services. This particular paper will focus on UAS law enforcement surveillance missions. Law enforcement surveillance can take place during suspect pursuits and property observation. Law enforcement can also use UAS for covert surveillance missions in order to collect evidence on suspected criminal or terrorist activity. The main requirements for a police surveillance UAS include:

-        Sufficient endurance and range to remain on station for an extended period of time, if required.

-        Easy launch and recovery capability to allow operations from the unimproved fields and congested areas. Use of vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) UAS platform may be preferred.

-        Quality camera sensor in order to produce high definition video and still images for evidence.

-        Low noise propulsion system to allow for covert surveillance missions if required.

-        Other sensors such as night vision, thermal, and infrared can be used for night operations.

-        Rugged platform, which is capable of operating in the adverse weather conditions, such as high winds and in both low and high temperature environments.

-        Vehicle’s operational safety. Safety of the officers and the civilians is the top priority. Choosing a reliable UAS platform will ensure that the wellbeing of persons on the ground and their property will be protected. It is important to incorporate safety and trouble-shooting features into the UAS to alert the UAS operator of any malfunction (Aerion, 2011).

For the purpose of this mission the author has selected three UAS platforms that can be used for police surveillance missions. The first UAS platform is the Qube made by the AeroVironment (Figure 1). The Qube features an easy control system and intuitive user interface. Weighting just 5.5 pounds, it is small enough to be easily transported in a police car and quickly launched on site (AeroVironment, n.d.). It incorporates advanced sensors, such as a high definition video camera and a thermal camera with zoom. This dual sensor suit will allow the UAS to acquire surveillance footage in both day and night conditions. The Qube has 40 minutes endurance and over half a mile range, which makes it suitable for short range surveillance operations (AeroVironment, n.d.).

Figure 1. The AeroVironemnt Qube. Adapted from “Qube,” by the AeroVironment, n.d. Copyright by AeroVironment.

The second vehicle is the Yuneec Typhoon H Pro UAS (Figure 2). It features a high definition CGO3+ 4K camera with a gimbal and a powerful real-time video transmitter, which is able to downlink video within a one-mile range, making it useful for law enforcement surveillance (Yuneec, n.d.). One great feature of this UAS is that in incorporates Intel® RealSense™ Technology, which allows it to navigate in confined environments, detect and avoid obstacles, while simultaneously following the operator (Homeland surveillance and electronics [HSE], n.d.). The Typhoon also has several flight modes, which can be preprogrammed before launch. These modes include journey, point of interest, follow me, and return home. The Typhon is a six rotor VTOL UAS. For additional safety, it can automatically switch to five rotor mode operations in case of a single rotor failure. The disadvantage of this vehicle is its limited range and restricted endurance. The battery on this UAS can only last around 25 minutes (Yuneec, n.d.).

Figure 2. The Typhoon with high definition camera. Adapted from “Typhoon UAS,” by Yuneec, n.d. Copyright by Yuneec.

The third option for surveillance applications is the Aeryon SkyRanger UAS. It has the longest endurance from all three represented vehicles. It is capable of staying aloft for up to 50 minutes. The SkyRanger features intuitive touchscreen interface and easy operation. It can be launched in the minutes’ notice and start simultaneously transmitting video and infrared imaging in real-time. It also can operate in the adverse weather conditions, such as high winds (up to 55 mph gusts) and extreme temperatures (-22F to 122 F) (Aerion, n.d.).

It features low-latency encrypted digital network, which enables simultaneous video streaming to multiple devices. It has the ability to include geotags and metadata along with images. The SkyRanger can operate beyond-line -of-sight with up to 3.1-mile range, keeping law enforcement personnel out of direct danger.

Figure 3. SkyRanger UAS. Adapted from “Aerion SkyRanger,” by Aerion, n.d. Copyright by Aerion.

The main benefit of UAS applications for law enforcement surveillance is keeping the law enforcement informed about criminal activity in real-time while keeping the officers out of direct danger. The UAS will greatly increase situational awareness and help prevent police ambushes. They can provide valuable surveillance on suspect’s location and let the police know if the person is armed. Law enforcement can benefit from the use of UAS for evidence collection, by inspecting difficult to access areas, while remaining undetected.

However, there are some issues with UAS use for surveillance that need to be discussed. These include ethical, legal, and moral considerations. First of all, police surveillance should take into consideration the citizens right for privacy. It is important to consider the circumstances when and if the warrant for evidence collection should be obtained prior to use of UAS. In some urgent cases, such as criminal standoff, there is not enough time to obtain a warrant. Therefore, in life-and death situations, police may choose to immediately launch a UAS to obtain the footage on suspect’s location and status.

UAS surveillance missions also can raise some ethical concerns. UAS can operate at much lower altitudes than manned aircraft. The vehicles can descend to window- level and record images inside of the person’s residence. Some UAS may operate virtually undetected due to their quiet propulsion and small size. All of these factors make people associate UAS with “spying” and cause concerns and even avid protests from private citizens. Balancing ethical considerations and legal aspects of the police surveillance is one of the major challenges law enforcement has to currently deal with in the use of UAS.

It is interesting to note, that some citizens have would resort to shooting down a police UAS if one overflew their property. According to a recent poll, almost fifty percent of Americans believe that they have the "right to destroy" a drone that flies over their property (Koebler, 2013). Approximately two thirds of Americans are concerned that the law enforcement drones will invade their privacy. Therefore, it is import to educate the general public on UAS benefits in order to gain acceptance for this new technology among the civilians.

At this time there is no lethally armed UAS used in law enforcement. In 2015, North Dakota passed a law, which approved the use of non-lethal weapons, such as rubber bullets, tear gas, and pepper spray on UAS (Reese, 2015). Although, lethally-armed UAS are still quite a distant future in law enforcement, it is important to consider the moral and ethical aspects of these kinds of missions.

Use of UAS in police surveillance applications can provide a valuable insight on criminal and terrorist activity and ultimately prevent crimes and save lives. UAS can offer a variety of benefits for law enforcement, while preserving lives of officers operating on the front lines. However, it is important to consider ethical, moral, and legal aspects of these types of missions. Proper legal framework should be established to help guide UAS use for surveillance. The general public should be educated on the benefits of UAS to increase public acceptance and to help law enforcement to fully explore its benefits of this emerging technology.

References

Aerion. (2011). Considerations in selecting a small UAV for police operations. Retrieved from https://www.aeryon.com/whitepaper/whitepaperpolice

Aerion. (n.d.). Aerion SkyRanger. Retrieved from https://www.aeryon.com/aeryon-skyranger

AeroVironment. (n.d.). Qube. Retrieved from http://www.avinc.com/uas/view/qube

Homeland surveillance and electronics LLC UAS. (n.d.). YUNEEC - Typhoon H Pro with Intel® RealSense™ technology. Retrieved from http://hse-uav.com/yuneec_typhoon_h_pro_detect_avoid.htm

Koebler, J. (2013, March 20). Senate weighs benefits, privacy concerns of domestic drones. U.S. News and World Report. Retrieved from http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/03/20/senate-weighs-benefits-privacy-concerns-of-domestic-drones

Reese, H. (2015). Police are now using drones to apprehend suspects and administer non-lethal force: A police chief weighs in. Retrieved from http://www.techrepublic.com/article/police-are-now-using-drones-to-apprehend-suspects-and-administer-non-lethal-force-a-police-chief/

Yuneec. (n.d.). Typhoon UAS. Retrieved from http://www.yuneecuav.com/yuneec-drones/