Documentary: Civilian Drones - Search & Rescue

Rigged4Flight

Rigged4Flight

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
1,105
Display Name
Display name:
Rigged4Flight
http://vimeo.com/77476282

From the intro on Vimeo: This documentary details the bureaucratic challenges faced by search and rescue personnel and their desperate need for civilian drones which are restricted by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Countless lives could be saved with this existing and affordable technology, but the government prohibited their use in 2007.

I haven't watched it yet. It will take several hours for it to download over the internet connection I have here. The premise of using drones for search & rescue sounds like a great match.

Nothing will ever replace human eyes, but drones could quickly cover a huge area in a short time. I posted another thread about a small fleet of drones that completely mapped the Matterhorn in just a few hours with focus levels down to centimeters. If such a thing could be applied to SAR missions it could revolutionize the whole process. Analysts back in a mission control center could pore over the videos and direct manned flights to locations where possible sightings were made. :yes:
 
Dr. O said:
Not in MY airspace you don't!
Click to expand...
This seems to be the usual first reaction from pilots.

Did you watch the video? The UAVs used during the video never even come close to where you would be flying. Unless you had crashed - and then they would be the ones that found you.
 
The premise that they "need" them is a sales pitch. None were "needed" by emergency managers in the recent Colorado Flooding SAR activities. In fact when one of the UAV operating companies decided to fly without talking to the Air Ops Branch Director , they were summarily told they were grounded until they did.
 
If I'm bobbing up and down off the Pacific coast, I don't want to see a damn drone, I want to see a helicopter or a life raft being pushed out the rear of a C130.
 
denverpilot said:
The premise that they "need" them is a sales pitch.
Click to expand...
Of course it's a sales pitch. But the pitch in the video was from the guy organizing the resources for the searches he was doing. He gave real life examples of actual searches where all other resources had been exhausted before they finally turned the UAV loose. Result? Missing persons found within hours, when days had already been wasted.

None were "needed" by emergency managers in the recent Colorado Flooding SAR activities.
Click to expand...
So I did a google news search and just clicked on the first result that popped up for "colorado search and rescue flooding". The link for that news report is: http://www.foxnews.com/weather/2013/09/16/colorado-braces-for-more-heavy-rain-deadly-floods/

That report talks about hundreds still missing in spite of massive search and rescue efforts involving hundreds of people, aircraft, vehicles, etc. Sounds to me like the rescue coordinator could work a skilled UAV operator somewhere in to that massive effort.

Don't get me wrong - I in no way am saying that every SAR mission could benefit from a UAV. Just like not every missing person generates a SAR flight. But it is a valuable tool that people (including many here on PoA) summarily dismiss without a second thought. Which is a shame, considering lives are at stake. A UAV is even better suited for the searches where all that is expected is a dead body.

In fact when one of the UAV operating companies decided to fly without talking to the Air Ops Branch Director , they were summarily told they were grounded until they did.
Click to expand...
I don't blame the director. All efforts need to be coordinated, and the UAV had no business inserting their system in to the middle of the circus uninvited. Does that mean there was no place in the system for a UAV? No - it means that either the Director didn't have a UAV resource in his arsenal, or he was uncomfortable/inexperienced with their use.
 
Sac Arrow said:
If I'm bobbing up and down off the Pacific coast, I don't want to see a damn drone, I want to see a helicopter or a life raft being pushed out the rear of a C130.
Click to expand...
Did no one watch the video I linked in the first post? :rolleyes:

When would you like to see that helicopter or C130? A week? Ten days? Two weeks? Or how about just a few hours? That's the difference a UAV search can make.

Send out the drones on a route that covers the entire search area. The normal SAR teams would already be going the same thing they always do - flying their search patterns. Once the drones are done (or while they are still out), use either human eyes or software-based algorithms to scour a composite picture of the search area for floating debris or people. Send the coordinates of any possible sightings to the nearest SAR team.

This is a tool we have available right now. It is stupid and shameful for us to not use it.
 
Rigged4Flight said:
I don't blame the director. All efforts need to be coordinated, and the UAV had no business inserting their system in to the middle of the circus uninvited. Does that mean there was no place in the system for a UAV? No - it means that either the Director didn't have a UAV resource in his arsenal, or he was uncomfortable/inexperienced with their use.
Click to expand...

Yup. A *professional* UAV operator that knew how to behave in a high traffic density environment would probably have been far better welcomed. The Boulder company didn't do themselves or any other UAV operators any favors. They also whined on their blog which attracted the attention of IEEE who resounded the gong and got all huffy with them, before investigating the facts. Dumb on IEEE's part. Made them look stupid.
 
The guy that made the video is obviously playing on the sympathies of the audience. That said, the FAA is about 10 years too late n crafting anything about "drone" aircraft, in particular, use in any type of LEO or commercial operation.
I would not have a problem if LEOs or government agencies were allowed to use them much the same as aircraft but the real issues are safety and privacy. How do you realistically protect the public from errant drones, and how do you protect the (invasion of) privacy of the individual.
I'm all for using all your tools in your box for SAR but the answers need to come.
This guy certainly didnt help the industry or the model aircraft hobiests.
 
Yes, some Joe somewhere could fly his UAV over your backyard pool and watch your wife sunbathing. Same thing has happened with manned vehicles since the dawn of manned flight.

The problem here is that Joe next door can do that right now. Right. Now. But Joe next door cannot use that same UAV to find your wife if she gets lost in the desert or falls overboard from a cruise. So all your worries are already true, and we get none of the benefits of the technology that you are so worried about.
 
All I can say is that John Connor's mission will be a whole lot easier if he doesn't have armed drones to contend with.
 
silver-eagle said:
How do you realistically protect the public from errant drones, and how do you protect the (invasion of) privacy of the individual.
Click to expand...
People have been taking pictures from above your head for a long time, both from airplanes and satellites.
 
Everskyward said:
People have been taking pictures from above your head for a long time, both from airplanes and satellites.
Click to expand...
Stop with your logic and common sense, already. :yesnod:

To be honest, a fleet of UAVs (or a single drone taking a bit longer) could micro-map your property with high definition imagery. It could be done for you (if you wanted a detailed view of everything you own) or it could be done by your snooping neighbor. The difference, again, is that it can be done right now by your neighbor without your permission - but you cannot legally pay your neighbor to do it for you.
 
Nooo. What ever will CAP do? They'll have to come up with a new core mission statement. Flightline marshaling and marching perhaps?
The flyover without seeing anything percentage is horrific, but I don't think that changes with a video camera.
Would these things have found Fossett?
 
ClimbnSink said:
Would these things have found Fossett?
Click to expand...
I don't know if they would have or not, but it couldn't have hurt the odds.

If there was profit to be made, I bet some enterprising company could come up with an algorithm that would scan captured images for likely SAR targets. Probably already exists somewhere in the military intel toolbox.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top