6.5 - Research: Automatic Takeoff and Landing

6.5 - Research: Automatic Takeoff and Landing

Greg D. Laxton

ASCI 638 – Human Factors in Unmanned Aeronautical Systems

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University-Worldwide

19 February 2017

Autoland and the Boeing 787

The automatic landing system on the Boeing 787 family of aircraft can precisely bring the jet to the desired runway. The pilot must select an approach from the flight management computer options, engage the autopilot and autothrottle system, and then push the approach button. Of course the pilot will still have to lower the landing gear, arm the speedbrake, complete the required checklist, communicate with ATC and select a landing flaps, but, if all this is done, the plane will land itself. The aircraft makes adjustments to the flight path to counter crosswinds, keeping the plane properly aligned with the landing runway.

The pilot can disconnect the autopilot during an autoland at any time, assuming manual control. Whether or not the landing can continue is dependent on the weather conditions, specifically the visibility at the landing runway, but once the automation is disconnected, the pilot is again in control of the flight path. The aircraft conducts a self-test of the autoland system early in the approach and alerts the pilot to any degraded systems or malfunctions. If the autoland mechanism fail during the approach, and depending on the failure, the pilot will hear an audible warning and see an alert light. The autopilot may or may not disengage, the system lets the pilot know it is downgraded and relies on his judgement to continue the approach or not. Crewmembers all receive autoland training during type rating qualification. The Boeing 787 autoland system is a very sophisticated and reliable function of the airplane.

Insitu Mark 4 launcher

The Insitu ScanEagle, Integrator and RQ-21A Blackjack line of UAS have automated takeoff and landing capability. The UAS are usually launched using the Mark 4 Launcher, a trailer-mounted platform weighing over 4,000 lbs. (Insitu, 2015). The Mark 4 is self-powered with an onboard diesel generator and air compressor. It uses a catapult mechanism to sling the different Insitu models up to flying speed. The operator then remotely pilots the UAS.

Insitu Mark 3 SkyHook

For landing, the Insitu UAS are “caught” in a proprietary recovery system call the “SkyHook” (Insitu, 2015). The SkyHook is also portable and self-powered like the launching system and it allows the Insitu UAS to be recovered after flight without the need for a runway. The UAS are automatically guided to the SkyHook, which has a suspended cable that snags the swept back wing, capturing the aircraft. Navigation to the SkyHook is augmented with kinematic GPS for precision “approach and capture” (Insitu, 2015). Training to operate the various Insitu UAS models can be conducted during a 10 week operator course (Insitu, 2015).

Limitations and Recommendations

            There are limitations to the launch and recovery equipment. The machines are heavy, require a tow vehicle and at least one operator to set up and load the devices (Insitu, 2015). The size of the Mark 4 and SkyHook will limit the UAS ability to deploy in difficult or heavily wooded terrain, so any improvements to the portability would help mitigate these issues. Regarding automation of the three Insitu UAS, an operator is required for set up and recovery, but the flight is operated from a GCS with either direct pilot input, or via pre-programmed route of flight.

References

Insitu. (2015). Mark 4 Launcher. Retrieved from https://insitu.com/images/uploads/pdfs/Launcher_Mark4_INT_ProductCard_PR041615.pdf

Insitu. (2015). Mark 3 SkyHook. Retrieved from https://insitu.com/images/uploads/pdfs/SkyHook_Mark3_ProductCard_PR051915.pdf

5.6 - Research: Shift Work Schedule

                                                                            

5.4 - Research: Shift Work Schedule

Greg D. Laxton

ASCI 638 – Human Factors in Unmanned Aeronautical Systems

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University-Worldwide

12 February 2017

Introduction

Combatting the fatiguing schedules associated with shift work is like battling jet lag for aircrew during long haul operations. The body has a hard time adjusting to the new sleep schedule. A rule of thumb among travelers, is that the body will require one day of adjustment for every hour of the new time zone (Science Daily, 2013). My proposal is to gradually shift the work report times for the MQ-1B squadron by one hour per day.

If the crews must change quickly between day, swing and night schedules, there really is no way to avert significant fatigue. This is what Schroeder found with his examination of FAA air traffic controllers. They used a “2- 2-1” schedule, which correlated to higher fatigue in his study (Schroeder, 2008).

Current Schedule Review

The four teams in the provided schedule have been placed on a “6 on 2 off rotating shift schedule” by the MQ -1B squadron. This current schedule has the teams in a rotation from day, to swing to night shift. There are six days of work in a row, followed by two scheduled days off. The day shift from 0730-1600 is a normal work period and shouldn’t be contributing to the fatigue claimed by the teams. The swing shift work hours from 1530-2400 is a little harder on the body clock, but after two off days in the schedule, it should not be contributing greatly to the complaints of fatigue. Lastly, the night shift from 2330-0800, is the primary culprit. These hours are very difficult to adjust to, even after two off days in the current schedule. This schedule is a clockwise rotation, meaning the shifts become later, with each eight-day block.

Shift Work and Fatigue

Shift work is different from adjusting to new time zones required as an international traveler, because in the new location, the sunrise and sunset help the body cope with the new day/night schedule. During shift work, in the same time zone, the natural light of sunrise and sunset is not in sync with the body clock and the new work / rest schedule, which slows the body’s adjustment. However, the idea of adjusting slowly, by one hour per day, is sound and worth trying for this squadron.

The internal body clock “gradually resets itself, at an average rate of an hour a day” (Merz, 2016). A more gradual adjustment to the shift schedule, would benefit the four squadron teams.  If the teams move one hour per day, it may allow the internal body clock to more slowly adjust to the sleep / rest cycle. I agree with Burgess (Burgess, M.D., M.P.H., 2007, p. S91), that a clockwise rotation is preferred. Gradually moving the shift to the right appears to be easier than earlier reporting each day.

Recommendation

My recommendation is to get rid of the day, swing and night shifts, replacing them with 24 schedules, as noted in the attachment. In my proposal, Team 1 would report as normal on day one and work from 0730-1600, on day two, their schedule is one hour later, from 0830-1700, and so on. After six work days, they would have two off. Each team would start on a different rotation, but after 24 calendar days, they would be back to the beginning of the schedule. Team 4 is the fill in team, where they do not precisely roll one hour each day. They will have adequate rest when they switch day to night, etc. I recommend assessing the fatigue levels of all four teams after three months of this schedule to validate the new rotation.

  

References

Burgess, M.D., M.P.H., P. A. (2007). Optimal Shift Duration and Sequence: Recommended Approach for Short-Term Emergency Response Activations for Public Health and Emergency Management. American Public Health Association, 97, S88-S92.

Merz, B. (2016, September 8). Resetting your circadian clock to minimize jet lag - Harvard Health Blog - Harvard Health Publications. Retrieved from http://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/resetting-your-circadian-clock-to-minimize-jet-lag-2016090810279

Schroeder, D. (2008, June 17). Sleep/Wake Cycles and Performance of ATC Operators. Retrieved from https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/avs/offices/afs/afs200/media/aviation_fatigue_symposium/SchroederAppComplete.pdf

Science Daily. (2013, August 29). Jet lag: Why the body clock is slow to adjust to time changes. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/08/130829124013.htm

Sat

Sun

Mon

Tue

Wed

Thu

Fri

Sat

Sun

Mon

Tue

Wed

Thu

Fri

Sat

Sun

Mon

Tue

Wed

Thu

Fri

Sat

Sun

Mon

Team

1/0

1/1

1/2

1/3

1/4

1/5

1/6

1/7

1/8

1/9

1/10

1/11

1/12

1/13

1/14

1/15

1/16

1/17

1/18

1/19

1/20

1/21

1/22

1/23

Team 1

07:30A-4P

08:30A-5P

OFF

OFF

11:30A-8P

12:30P-9P

1:30P-10P

2:30P-11P

3:30P-12A

4:30P-1A

OFF

OFF

7:30P-4A

8:30P-5A

9:30P-6A

10:30P-7A

11:30P-8A

12:30P-9A

OFF

OFF

3:30A-12P

4:30A-1P

5:30A-2P

6:30A-3P

Team 2

3:30P-12A

4:30P-1A

5:30P-2A

6:30P-3A

OFF

OFF

9:30P-6A

10:30P-7A

11:30P-8A

12:30A-9A

1:30A-10A

2:30A-11A

OFF

OFF

5:30A-2P

6:30A-3P

07:30A-4P

08:30A-5P

9:30A-6P

10:30A-7P

OFF

OFF

1:30P-109

2:30P-11P

Team 3

11:30P-8A

12:30A-9A

1:30A-10A

2:30A-11A

3:30A-12P

4:30A-1P

OFF

OFF

07:30A-4P

08:30A-5P

9:30A-6P

10:30A-7P

11:30A-8P

12:30P-9P

OFF

OFF

3:30P-12A

4:30P-1A

5:30P-2A

6:30P-3A

7:30P-4A

8:30P-5A

OFF

OFF

Team 4

OFF

OFF

9:30A-6P

10:30A-7P

7:30P-4A

8:30P-5A

9:30P-6A

10:30P-7A

OFF

OFF

5:30P-2A

6:30P-3A

3:30A-12P

4:30A-1P

1:30P-10P

2:30P-11P

OFF

OFF

1:30P-10P

2:30P-11P

11:30P-8A

12:30A-9A

9:30P-6A

10:30P-7A

4.7 - Research: UAS Beyond Light of Sight Operations

4.5 - Research: UAS Beyond Line of Sight Operations

Greg D. Laxton

ASCI 638 – Human Factors in Unmanned Aeronautical Systems

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University-Worldwide

5 February 2017

Pathfinder FAA Program

The Boeing Insitu ScanEagle has been involved in domestic U.S. BLOS tests, as part of the FAA Pathfinder program (Federal Aviation Administration, 2016). The Pathfinder program had three focus areas, VLOS over people, longer range VLOS in rural areas and BLOS operations in more isolated areas of the country (Federal Aviation Administration, 2016). The ScanEagle participated in the third part of the Pathfinder program during the fall of 2015 in conjunction with BNSF Railway (SUAS News, 2015).

            The goal of this particular New Mexico test was to demonstrate how UAS can operate BLOS domestically and support critical infrastructure inspection. The ScanEagle successfully provided video in real-time over a 64 miles of railroad track (SUAS News, 2015). The next phase BNSF will undertake is to bring Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) or other position reporting information back to the GCS from fixed sensors along the UAS route (Washington, 2016).

Fixed Sensors Along UAS Route

            The idea involves placing sensors at predetermined points along the route to be inspected. The sensors for this project were deployed by the Harris Corporation, a Melbourne, Florida based technology company heavily involved in air traffic management. It placed its ADS-B Xtend sensors, which is portable, at intervals along the railroad track. These sensors are battery powered, tubular shaped and approximately a foot and a half long. The Xtend can receive “transponder signals on 1090 MHz and 978 MHz frequencies as far away as 150 mi” (Croft, 2016). No additional people are needed once the sensors are placed along the inspection route and they use a cellular signal to transmit the data back to the GCS. The sensors greatly increase the ADS-B signal and provides a much better picture of the operating area back to the GCS.

            The Xtend tests should provide data to the BNSF GCS through the “Harris’s web-based Symphony RangeVue application” (Washington, 2016). This is a product that combines ATC traffic information, weather and airspace restrictions and displays them for the UAS operator on a laptop or any web connected display device (Washington, 2016).

Advantages and Disadvantages of Fixed Sensors

            Fixed sensors have the ability to augment command and control signals to a UAS, but with the obvious disadvantage of limiting the planned flight route. The Pathfinder test with BNSF is ideal for fixed sensors, because the railroad tracks must be inspected and do not usually move. A key aspect of this test was demonstrating to the FAA that UAS can operate BLOS and still stay connected to an ATC system and display ADS-B data to other aircraft and back to the operator. The ability to see all traffic in the vicinity is clearly a concern for FAA considering integrating UAS in the NAS. This may be a path to success.

Human Factor Issues

            If UAS operators are confident they have a clear picture of other traffic operating near their aircraft, this should help maintain situational awareness for manned and unmanned aircraft. Decision making ability for pilots should be easier when all the traffic can clearly “see” each other, know their altitude with the ADS-B signal, and take appropriate action to avoid a collision. The Symphony RangeVue depiction and a clear awareness of other traffic in the area should lead to an increased situational awareness for the UAS operator and help in the transition from BLOS to LOS.

Commercial Applications

            The ADS-B Xtend devices may lead the way in fixed observation situations such as pipeline and rail inspection. Railroad inspections are labor intensive and utilizing UAS should offer a clear economic advantage. The BNSF and FAA Pathfinder program is a good example for this industry.

            One downside of many more fixed ADS-B transmit / received devices like Xtend, is task saturation of the system. Divas reports that once the UAS level rises to more than five per square kilometer, “co-channel interference” is likely (Divas, 2016). This may eventually limit the maximum number of users in a geographic area, reducing the advantage of a fixed sensor system, but it does offer a clear path forward for BLOS UAS operations in the NAS.

  

References

Croft, J. (2016, May 13). Railway Company To Test sUAS Methods For Track Inspections. Retrieved from awin.aviationweek.com.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu

Divas, D. A. (2016, May 16). Obstacles Appear to Extending GPS-Based ADS-B for UAV Operations | Inside GNSS. Retrieved from http://insidegnss.com/node/4944

Federal Aviation Administration. (2016, June 14). Focus Area Pathfinder Program. Retrieved from https://www.faa.gov/uas/programs_partnerships/focus_area_pathfinder/

SUAS News. (2015, November 25). Insitu and BNSF ScanEagle first commercial BVLOS flight. - sUAS News - The Business of Drones. Retrieved from https://www.suasnews.com/2015/11/insitu-and-bnsf-scaneagle-first-commercial-bvlos-flight/

Washington, G. W. (2016). Mobile ADS-B Enables Beyond-Line-of-Sight UAS. Aviation Week and Space Technology. Retrieved from http://awin.aviationweek.com.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/

3.6 – Research: UAS Integration in the NAS

3.4 – Research: UAS Integration in the NAS

Gregory Laxton

ASCI 638 – Human Factors in Unman Aerospace Systems

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University-Worldwide

January 29^th, 2017

            The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Next Generation (NextGen) air transportation system was started in 2003 and originally intended to improve the “capacity, efficiency, and safety” (In Liddle & In Millett, 2015, p. vii) of the National Air Transportation System. In addition, it hopes to reduce carbon emissions and lower pollution. There are many components that fall under the “NextGen” moniker at the FAA. For example, they would like to quicken departures and arrivals by increasing the digital communications between the FAA controllers and users of the NAS (Federal Aviation Administration, 2017). The FAA hopes using performance navigation (PBN) along with required new technology onboard aircraft, will allow more takeoffs and landings from existing airports, increasing capacity. The FAA wants to improve navigation with more direct routing and increase the amount of aircraft that can take off and land each hour on existing runways. It’s a very ambitious plan for the FAA.

            En route flow improvements the FAA hopes to make will utilize Time Based Flow Management (TBFM) and Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) to increase efficiency across the country (Federal Aviation Administration, 2017). On arrival, one way the FAA hopes to smooth flow in to congested airports, is creating new waypoints and constant descent profiles, and specific arrival times at these points. There are many more pieces of the NextGen puzzle such as sending taxi instructions to pilots prior to landing in hopes of expediting aircraft off the runway and minimizing confusion with controllers.

Not everyone is pleased with new departure and arrival flows, which can be very different from long standing flight patterns. It may increase numbers at the airport, but if air traffic has increased 500% over your home, you may not be a fan of NextGen. In Phoenix, residents are upset exactly over this issue. They were not consulted by the FAA before the new flight paths were implemented. Consequently, resident noise complaints in the affected areas have risen dramatically. The mayor of Phoenix said he felt blind-sided by the FAA (CBS News, 2015).

            The FAA, like every federal agency, has a limited budget and must priorities resources. NextGen is an expensive goal, and the FAA said in 2015 it was forced to choose between ongoing maintenance of the existing infrastructure and “keeping NextGen progress” on schedule (Broderick, 2015).

One of the NextGen technologies which may help integrate UAS in to the NAS, is the proposed national Airspace System Voice System (NVS) (Federal Aviation Administration, 2017). This should allow controllers and aircraft to communicate via router based technology, essentially bypassing the line of sight VHF procedures in place now. In the proposal, a controller will be able to talk with an aircraft anywhere in the system, not just in its geographic region. This could benefit UAS operators flying BLOS. For example, if I can fly a UAS three states away, and still use router based communication to speak with a local controller, it helps remove an obstacle for UAS operating in the same airspace as manned aircraft. This would be a crucial benefit for UAS operators. If the GCS is in Nevada, but the UAS is overflying Texas, this technology if implemented, would allow the GCS to speak directly with Ft. Worth center, just like the commercial manned aircraft overhead. It doesn’t solve all the communication problems, but it helps.

From a human factors perspective, communications between traffic controllers and UAS GCS operators will be a challenge. It’s not hard to foresee several missed transmissions because the UAS operator needs a physiological break and is away from their station. If datalink sends text messages, the operator could execute the instructions immediately when back in position, but this response may lag in comparison manned aircraft.

References

Broderick, S. (2015, February 5). FAA Budget Request Balances Current Needs, NextGen | Aftermarket Solutions content from Aviation Week. Retrieved from http://aviationweek.com/aftermarket-solutions/faa-budget-request-balances-current-needs-nextgen

CBS News. (2015, January 30). FAA's new air traffic control system NextGen causing major noise pollution - CBS News. Retrieved from http://www.cbsnews.com/news/faa-new-air-traffic-control-system-nextgen-causing-major-noise-pollution/

Federal Aviation Administration. (2017, January 12). Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen). Retrieved from https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/

In Liddle, D. E., & In Millett, L. I. (2015). A review of the next generation air transportation system: Implications and importance of system architecture. DC.

National Research Council (U.S.). (2015). Transformation in the air: A review of the FAA's Certification Research Plan. DC: National Academy of Sciences.

2.5 - Research: UAS GCS Human Factors Issue

UAS Ground Control Station (GCS) and Human Factors

The UAS GCS selected for this paper is Insitu’s Common Open Mission Management Command and Control (ICOMC2). The ICOMC2 is portable and can be installed and operated from a laptop. Insitu says the ICOMC2 can control multiple unmanned vehicles from a single work station and provides the operator with a video overlay function (Insitu, 2016).

The ICOMC2 display is configurable by the operator. For example, the user can show engine parameters in one window and use drop down menus to select specific vehicle conditions such as airspeed and altitude in another. The operator may choose to display a map overlay in yet another window and a sensor feed in a third. These can be adjusted and manipulated with common keyboard, mouse and touchpad laptop controls (Insitu, 2016). For navigation of the UA, the user can select a waypoint on the map or have the aircraft fly a pre-programmed route.

Insitu advertises an Augmented Video Overlay System (AVOS) that provides operators with various overlays of a video sensor feed in the ICOMC2 system. It can add terrain elevation, acoustic detectability and other satellite data such as borders or restricted airspace (Insitu, 2016). This capability should increase the situational awareness for the user, helping them navigate safely around the search area. This display method should increase the “operator imagery interpretation (Cooke, 2006, p. 153)” as described by Cooke, and increase situational awareness compared to a top-down view. However, environmental conditions such as cloud cover or nighttime operations may negate the AVOS advantages, similar to manned aircraft. Technology may offer mitigation in the form of a virtual reality headset such as the Oculus Rift, a COTS virtual reality headset that retails for $699 dollars (Greenwald, 2016). Virtual reality may offer enough of an immersive experience that the operator can maintain a higher level of situational awareness.

The ICOMC2 is a laptop display capably of controlling multiple UA at once (Insitu, 2016). This implies a considerable workload increase for the operator as each UA is added to the mission; a concern from a human factors perspective. If the operator is trying to control multiple aircraft, it would quickly become difficult to maintain situational awareness, especially if one of the UAs experience a malfunction. This may focus the operator’s attention on the problem aircraft and may not allow enough extra mental capacity to make time critical decisions for the other aircraft, a typical task saturation and negative human factors concern.

Another possible negative human factors issue with the ICOMC2 is the laptop interface described above. The user manipulates the display while operating the various compatible UAs. Familiarity with laptops controls is likely universal. Everyone should understand how a mouse or touchpad controls functions on a screen. The downside from a human factors point of view is this is not normal aircraft controls for trained pilots. For example, a pilot will pull back on the controls in an aircraft to increase flight altitude. On the ICOMC2, or any laptop controlled UAS, it may be a mouse command or even typing in the desired altitude before the UA begins a climb.

A conventional laptop human machine interface (HMI) lacks tactile feedback. A manned aircraft pilot may experience audible and tactile alerts when approaching a stall, something likely not available from standard laptop configurations. A mitigation strategy for this could include using controls similar to manned aircraft, and provide more conventional aircraft controls to the operator.

REFERENCES

Cooke, N. J. (2006). Human factors of remotely operated vehicles. Amsterdam, United Kingdom: Elsevier JAI.

Greenwald, W. (2016, December 20). The Best VR (Virtual Reality) Headsets of 2017. Retrieved from http://www.pcmag.com/article/342537/

Insitu. (2016). Insitu - Insitu Common Open Mission Management Command and Control (ICOMC2). Retrieved from https://insitu.com/information-delivery/command-and-control/icomc2#2

9.4 - Blog: The Future of the UAS

How to I learned to stop worrying and love the bomb dropping UAS

I know, a Dr. Strangelove reference, and Slim Pickens won't be riding on a UAS anytime soon, but it couldn’t be helped because the days are here when terror organizations weaponize commercial UAVs and use them to drop explosives. There is a crude video online with a commercial quad copter releasing a small blue explosive on an unsuspecting position (Josh, 2016). Then in October, a booby-trapped UAV reportedly exploded and two Kurdish fighters were killed and two French soldiers were wounded (Benoit, 2016). The UAV landed and after the forces approached to investigate, it detonated. Word will spread quickly and this technique will not be as effective because soldiers will destroy the UAV, rather than approach it. Other techniques will be harder to deter. First person viewing (FPV), combined with a small payload, accurately placed could be a formidable weapon. Currently available small UAS don’t carry heavy payloads, but small explosives dropped precisely can damage critical components, and the threat is likely here.

Future terror applications

It’s not hard to envision a commercial UAS, flying directly over a target, releasing an explosive, and retreating. It would be very difficult for law enforcement to track the small craft, and find the perpetrator. In fact, if the quad copter releases the explosive from high enough, no one on the ground may be aware of it at all, and would not know where bomb came from.

What about other payloads? Are releases of chemical agents much farther behind? It’s not a stretch from agricultural applications, to releasing nerve or blister agents to a small area. Again, probably not a large scale weapon, but there are many soft targets to harass.

Relatively small commercial UAVs can carry several pounds of payload, including a camera for targeting.  Even if the range is limited to a mile or less, a weapon from above is very dangerous. Consider all the outdoor events by political leaders, or sporting events, etc. The targets are almost unlimited if terror is the goal. Will a UAS deliver an IED in to a crowd (Bunker, 2015). If one UAS is effective, how about flying 50 of them to a target? How long until a small UAS, flies directly in to the path of a commercial airplane? Unfortunately, the threat options are only limited by the terrorist creativity.

Countering the threat

Anti UAS weapons are going to be needed, and sooner rather than later. A dedicated adversary will change attack strategies and no doubt adapt to counter threats, so technology and methods must be developed to target and disrupt incoming UAS attacks quickly and effectively. The Battelle systems DroneDefender claims this ability (Battelle, 2016). It reportedly interrupts the GPS and control signals, diverting or downing the attacker. The devices can be disrupted kinetically, but countering a small, relatively silent UAS will likely remain difficult for those charged with protecting civilians.

Battelle. (2016). Our Work | National Security | Tactical Systems | Battelle DroneDefender™ | Battelle. Retrieved from http://www.battelle.org/our-work/national-security/tactical-systems/battelle-dronedefender

Benoit, D. (2016, November 29). Growing fears of IS use of weaponised drones [Video file]. Retrieved from http://phys.org/news/2016-11-weaponised-drones.html

Bunker, R. J. (2015, August). TERRORIST AND INSURGENT UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLES: USE, POTENTIALS, AND MILITARY IMPLICATIONS. Retrieved from https://www.oodaloop.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/pub1287.pdf

Josh. (2016, September 3). Weaponized Quad-copter Drone Drops Warheads On Foreheads [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.funker530.com/weaponized-quad-drops/

McCuley, R. (2016, October 11). Unmanned Aerial Vehicles: Reaching the Tipping Point of a New Revolution in Aviation. Retrieved from http://www.govtech.com/fs/Unmanned-Aerial-Vehicles-Reaching-the-Tipping-Point-of-a-New-Revolution-in-Aviation.html

5.3 - Blog: UAS Use in Home Monitoring

The future applications of unmanned aerial systems (UAS) is just beginning to be glimpsed. They will complement existing technology and replace some current applications altogether. For example, home monitoring systems have been around for many years. They can include fixed video monitoring, motion sensors, audio alerts and remote monitoring. It is easy to see how sUAS will likely be included as a vital sensor, complimenting current systems and providing a mobile observation point, especially for hard to see property areas. A company called Sunflower Labs (Sunflower Labs, 2016) may be marketing precisely this application.

A popular current example of a fixed home monitoring system is the Ring Doorbell it alerts homeowners with audio and video feeds and sells for about 200$ (Ring, 2016). It is apparently effective, according to the thousands of reviews on Amazon.com (Amazon.com, 2016), but the video monitor is fixed to the doorbell and records from a single point of view. It is a clever idea and will augment other fixed cameras located around the home. Homeowners who have larger properties, or areas that are hidden from fixed video monitoring locations may want the ability to have a mobile video monitoring system. This is where a sUAS mounted camera would augment an existing system. Sunflower Labs has proposed adding this mobility using a sUAS mounted video camera to fixed based motion detectors. According to their website, the Sunflower Home Awareness System (Sunflower Labs, 2016) will use fixed motion sensors to identify unusual activity on the property, then automatically launch the sUAS mounted camera and send a picture of the area of interest directly to a smart phone.

Sunflower Labs is taking reservations for the system now and anticipates shipping to homeowners in 2017 (Sunflower Labs, 2016). It is a great idea and adds to existing home monitoring technology. I am confident UAVs will continue to proliferate and join other applications in the homeowner security business.

Amazon.com. (2016). Ring WI-Fi Enabled Video Doorbell - - Amazon.com. Retrieved from https://www.amazon.com/Ring-Wi-Fi-Enabled-Video-Doorbell/dp/B00N2ZDXW2/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1479150802&sr=8-2&keywords=ring+doorbellRing. (2016). Ring video doorbell for your smartphone |

Ring. Retrieved from https://ring.com/

Sunflower Labs. (2016, November 3). Sunflower labs modernizes home security with introduction of home awareness system. Retrieved from http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/sunflower-labs-modernizes-home-security-with-introduction-of-home-awareness-system-300356706.html