Time for a Debate on Australian UAVs
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wollongong
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Time for a Debate on Australian UAVs
There's a vigorous debate going on around the world on UAVs and the implications for civil airspace and safety of other aircraft. I haven't seen much on this on PPRUNE Downunder. Are we ready for UAVs in Australia? Interested in all views. To get you started, here's news from US AOPA on their work with RTCA and the FAA.
From US AOPA ONline: 'If UAVs are ever released into general airspace, they'll have to be able to do what a pilot in a Cessna 172 does — see and avoid other aircraft, operate within the confines of today's ATC system, and operate without special conditions or special services such as being able to deal with emergencies without endangering other aircraft."
AOPA has accepted the role as co-chair of RTCA's Special Committee 203, which will in essence write the UAV certification standards. RTCA is a private, not-for-profit membership organization that functions as a Federal Advisory Committee. RTCA advisory committees bring together government, industry, and academic experts to develop recommendations to be used by the FAA and the aviation community.
UAV operations in the U.S. are currently very limited. The drones fly within special-use airspace, either restricted areas or military operations areas. Outside of such airspace, UAV operations must have a "Certificate of Authorization" approved by both the air traffic and flight standards branches of the FAA. The operations have to be conducted within strict parameters, including using chase planes and/or ground spotters to monitor their activity.
AOPA has consistently advocated that UAVs must be as safe as piloted aircraft (See "No UAV close encounters.")
"Currently there are no UAVs or UAV pilots certified by the FAA," said Randy Kenagy, AOPA senior director of advanced technology and co-chairman of the UAV advisory committee.
"There's no doubt that UAVs are coming, and there is increased pressure on the FAA to approve their operation in the system. It is critical that these unmanned aircraft do not endanger other aircraft or result in restricting airspace. We will develop consensus standards involving both the UAV community and existing airspace users," said Kenagy.
There are some tough hurdles to jump before UAVs can share our airspace.
"Consider operating from a public-use airport," said Kenagy. "The UAV not only will have to 'detect and avoid' other aircraft, it will have to fit into the traffic pattern and communicate its intentions to other pilots."
Then consider emergencies. Some plans call for UAVs to fly at very high altitudes, well above general aviation and commercial airline operations. But what happens if there is an engine failure, and the aircraft has to descend through civilian traffic?
"Our benchmark for the standards will be a piloted vehicle operating VFR," said Kenagy. "Only when a UAV can fit into the system with the same level of safety will it be ready to share our airspace."
A sample of Australian projects:
From US AOPA ONline: 'If UAVs are ever released into general airspace, they'll have to be able to do what a pilot in a Cessna 172 does — see and avoid other aircraft, operate within the confines of today's ATC system, and operate without special conditions or special services such as being able to deal with emergencies without endangering other aircraft."
AOPA has accepted the role as co-chair of RTCA's Special Committee 203, which will in essence write the UAV certification standards. RTCA is a private, not-for-profit membership organization that functions as a Federal Advisory Committee. RTCA advisory committees bring together government, industry, and academic experts to develop recommendations to be used by the FAA and the aviation community.
UAV operations in the U.S. are currently very limited. The drones fly within special-use airspace, either restricted areas or military operations areas. Outside of such airspace, UAV operations must have a "Certificate of Authorization" approved by both the air traffic and flight standards branches of the FAA. The operations have to be conducted within strict parameters, including using chase planes and/or ground spotters to monitor their activity.
AOPA has consistently advocated that UAVs must be as safe as piloted aircraft (See "No UAV close encounters.")
"Currently there are no UAVs or UAV pilots certified by the FAA," said Randy Kenagy, AOPA senior director of advanced technology and co-chairman of the UAV advisory committee.
"There's no doubt that UAVs are coming, and there is increased pressure on the FAA to approve their operation in the system. It is critical that these unmanned aircraft do not endanger other aircraft or result in restricting airspace. We will develop consensus standards involving both the UAV community and existing airspace users," said Kenagy.
There are some tough hurdles to jump before UAVs can share our airspace.
"Consider operating from a public-use airport," said Kenagy. "The UAV not only will have to 'detect and avoid' other aircraft, it will have to fit into the traffic pattern and communicate its intentions to other pilots."
Then consider emergencies. Some plans call for UAVs to fly at very high altitudes, well above general aviation and commercial airline operations. But what happens if there is an engine failure, and the aircraft has to descend through civilian traffic?
"Our benchmark for the standards will be a piloted vehicle operating VFR," said Kenagy. "Only when a UAV can fit into the system with the same level of safety will it be ready to share our airspace."
A sample of Australian projects:
Bureau of Meteorology - The
Aerosonde
Meteorological UAV;
British Aerospace Australia Nulka hovering rocket
electronic countermeasures UAV;
electronic countermeasures UAV;
Boeing ASTA Jindivik Target UAV;
Sydney University - UAV Project Ariel, VTOL
Tail-Sitter UAV, UAV Brumby;
Tail-Sitter UAV, UAV Brumby;
RMIT and CSIRO Division of Atmospheric
Research Victoria - UAV Project MAFV Sarus;
Research Victoria - UAV Project MAFV Sarus;
Australian Aerial Surveillance Services - Heli-Kite
UAV;
Ark Associates Pty Ltd - Softwing UAV;
Thin Air Communication Aircraft (Australia) Pty.
Ltd. - TACA Telecommunications Project;
Ltd. - TACA Telecommunications Project;
Australian Mineral Industries Research
Association Limited - Project P462 “Geophysical
Autonomous Model Aircraft Acquisition” -
feasibility study; and
Association Limited - Project P462 “Geophysical
Autonomous Model Aircraft Acquisition” -
feasibility study; and
a range of companies using small remotely piloted
UAVs for aerial photography and survey work.
UAVs for aerial photography and survey work.
If you take the human out of flying it becomes a video game. Every time I play video games I crash. I can see a bit of a connection. (Point 1. Don’t give me the job of flying them)
The price of crashing a UAV maybe Millions of $. The price if it collects an aircraft on the way...
A lot of people who make a whole heap more then I do had better do a lot of thinking before letting this bird loose. What strip is it going to operate out of? What time of the day? What safety features are there?
Seems like a good benchmark.
The price of crashing a UAV maybe Millions of $. The price if it collects an aircraft on the way...
A lot of people who make a whole heap more then I do had better do a lot of thinking before letting this bird loose. What strip is it going to operate out of? What time of the day? What safety features are there?
'If UAVs are ever released into general airspace, they'll have to be able to do what a pilot in a Cessna 172 does — see and avoid other aircraft, operate within the confines of today's ATC system, and operate without special conditions or special services such as being able to deal with emergencies without endangering other aircraft."
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Balgo
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just look at the low level survey guys -ie.Fugro. They will likely soon loose a lot of work to UAV's. It is unlikely that they will will loose their jobs or anything too drastic in the near future, but little niche applications like low level survey may go to the robots sooner than you may think!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wollongong
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sounds like a good first job for the ultra-expert DOTARS airspace authority, Huh...not. That and cleaning up Dick's NAS and ADS-B messes!
Seriously though, someone's gonna have to do some thinking soon...
From Aerospace daily:
"Australian planners have some rough notions of what a [military][sic]UAV will need to support an AESA-type radar. It includes a payload of at least 3,000 pounds, carried internally; greatly increased electrical power generation and a minimum of 200 kt. airspeed".
Hope they're fitted with ADS-B squitters and/or Mode A/Cs and they're turned 'ON', plus can sense-and-avoid the rest of us
This one'd give Ma and Pa Cessna a fright: The Mariner - Powered by the same Honeywell TPE 331-10T as the Predator B, the Mariner has a top speed of 220 knots, a ceiling of 52,000 feet, an internal payload capacity of 300 pounds, and an external capacity of 3,000 pounds.
Seriously though, someone's gonna have to do some thinking soon...
From Aerospace daily:
"Australian planners have some rough notions of what a [military][sic]UAV will need to support an AESA-type radar. It includes a payload of at least 3,000 pounds, carried internally; greatly increased electrical power generation and a minimum of 200 kt. airspeed".
Hope they're fitted with ADS-B squitters and/or Mode A/Cs and they're turned 'ON', plus can sense-and-avoid the rest of us
This one'd give Ma and Pa Cessna a fright: The Mariner - Powered by the same Honeywell TPE 331-10T as the Predator B, the Mariner has a top speed of 220 knots, a ceiling of 52,000 feet, an internal payload capacity of 300 pounds, and an external capacity of 3,000 pounds.
Last edited by wrongthong; 12th Jun 2006 at 10:16.
