The National Guard wants the airspace to fly their rescue missions, and the FAA has put restrictions on flying at low level altitudes(below 3000' )
FEMA is just the messenger in this case.
These days he is lucky that he was asked to land if he was flying it in a TFR. If you're going to release a UAV into the air during a massive search and rescue effort you're going to need to be there from day one coordinating it with local and gov agencies. You can't just walk in and start flying regardless of your setup.
Hopefully this raises awareness of what can be done. If it were up to me I'd definitely give the guy the airspace for 30 minutes!
It isn't as easy as just showing up and having a capability. If something goes south, does he have adequate insurance? Does he understand airspace restrictions and is he reporting to whoever in controlling the incident so they know what he's up to? And is he as good and safe as he thinks he is? If there's an accident and some official let him fly, that official and his or her agency accepted shared responsibility for what he does, which was probably the show-stopper. How can they know that he really is capable of operating safely and responsibly? Just take his word for it? All those CAP people were licensed pilots who had gone through training to do what they were doing.
Don't be surprised if at some point there's a "drone pilot" license, at least for commercial or emergency operations. There has to be some way to demonstrate knowledge and proficiency and for "regular" pilots, that means a license. At the very least insurance companies will probably require some sort of certification.
If you're going to release a UAV into the air during a massive search and rescue effort you're going to need to be there from day one coordinating it with local and gov agencies.
For the last three or four days, Falcon UAV has been volunteering with the Boulder County EOC (Emergency Operations Center) to coordinate mapping flights around the towns of Longmont and Lyons, just northeast of Boulder.
It isn't as easy as just showing up and having a capability. If something goes south, does he have adequate insurance? Does he understand airspace restrictions and is he reporting to whoever in controlling the incident so they know what he's up to? And is he as good and safe as he thinks he is? If there's an accident and some official let him fly, that official and his or her agency accepted shared responsibility for what he does, which was probably the show-stopper. How can they know that he really is capable of operating safely and responsibly? Just take his word for it? All those CAP people were licensed pilots who had gone through training to do what they were doing.
Don't be surprised if at some point there's a "drone pilot" license, at least for commercial or emergency operations. There has to be some way to demonstrate knowledge and proficiency and for "regular" pilots, that means a license. At the very least insurance companies will probably require some sort of certification.
Did you read the linked article? Maybe you missed the second paragraph?...
Falcon UAV is a Colorado company that makes a fixed-wing UAV (called a Falcon) that uses GPS and cameras to autonomously generate (among other things) highly accurate maps of the ground. The UAV is hand-launched, with an endurance of about an hour, and generally operates between 300 and 1,500 feet above the ground. It has public safety flight approvals from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to fly in some parts of Colorado. Basically, the point here is that we're not talking about some random dude with a quadrotor flying around taking pictures: the Falcons are designed for (and governmentally approved for) mapping missions in public airspace.
No, I saw the second paragraph, but mapping missions in public airspace isn't the same thing as operating in a TFR in a disaster relief situation where they are potentially over people and in proximity to other aircraft. They might be allowed to operate, and I'm sure the data are valuable, but they need to coordinate with the federal agencies that have jurisdiction over the airspace. Licensed pilots certainly have authorization to operate in public airspace, but let them stray into a TFR and they will be in hot water. The restrictions for this TFR are: "No pilots may operate an aircraft in the areas covered by this NOTAM (except as described)". Seems pretty clear to me. That means your authorization to do anything else, anywhere else doesn't matter. You need specific authorization to operate in the TFR. And the controlling agency is the FAA, not the county. The county EOC doesn't have the authority to allow an aircraft into a TFR.
But the problem is that it's the National Guard that's requested the Flight Restrictions, not the local emergency operations center.
The National Guard probably has no knowledge of his capability, and are too busy with their rescue efforts to deal with a POSSIBLE resource.
for now, his UAVs is just an obstacle to their choppers.
If he wants to help the National Guard, fine, but now is NOT the time to approach them.
After this mess is over, THEN he can approach them, show them his videos and demonstrate his equipment.
Then they can decide how and if the UAVs can be used, and either let his men train with their crews, or sell them UAVs and train their crews in handling them.
If he utters ONE WORD about how unfair/stupid/whatever it was that he wasn't allowed to fly... Well... never Smile off a customer...
And going to a magazine to cry about this 'unfairness'... not really that good, either.
Better to get the issues out in public where hey can be discussed, the sooner the better.
There is a steep learning curve with new technology. At this point a working device exists, but the potential customers are unaware of it capabilities and limitations. Of course one doesn't roll out new tech in the middle of a disaster. But now the discussion has started, perhaps the emergency services will begin considering possible application for next time.
Ummm. I believe there are 10 FEMA directors that report directly to the White House. They can even by-pass state governors, declare marital law, and deploy a state's National Guard in an emergency without the governor's consent.
In other words, if they want you to step aside... I'd get out of the way.
It isn't as easy as just showing up and having a capability. If something goes south, does he have adequate insurance? Does he understand airspace restrictions and is he reporting to whoever in controlling the incident so they know what he's up to? And is he as good and safe as he thinks he is? If there's an accident and some official let him fly, that official and his or her agency accepted shared responsibility for what he does, which was probably the show-stopper. How can they know that he really is capable of operating safely and responsibly? Just take his word for it? All those CAP people were licensed pilots who had gone through training to do what they were doing.
I am in the Civil Air Patrol as a member . We do a Ton of ongoing training to do our SAR's as safely as any one can .
every year I have to take more FEMA classes and keep up to date on the latest * best practices* ..
Gadgetman is spot on ..
NUMBER ONE RULE !
coordination !.. this is why the ICS was developed . ( started with CALfire ect ) .
If you want to help the SAR with assets . You better come with some serious paperwork OR have a MOU with US and the other agency's.
I don't care if you are best UAV pilot on the face of this earth .... you need to follow the chain of command .
jdolecki
Posts: 726
Comments
The National Guard wants the airspace to fly their rescue missions, and the FAA has put restrictions on flying at low level altitudes(below 3000' )
FEMA is just the messenger in this case.
http://tfr.faa.gov/tfr_map_ims/html/ns/scale3/tile_2_3.html
http://tfr.faa.gov/save_pages/detail_3_4474.html
These days he is lucky that he was asked to land if he was flying it in a TFR. If you're going to release a UAV into the air during a massive search and rescue effort you're going to need to be there from day one coordinating it with local and gov agencies. You can't just walk in and start flying regardless of your setup.
Hopefully this raises awareness of what can be done. If it were up to me I'd definitely give the guy the airspace for 30 minutes!
Don't be surprised if at some point there's a "drone pilot" license, at least for commercial or emergency operations. There has to be some way to demonstrate knowledge and proficiency and for "regular" pilots, that means a license. At the very least insurance companies will probably require some sort of certification.
Did you read the linked article? Maybe you missed the second paragraph?...
Falcon UAV is a Colorado company that makes a fixed-wing UAV (called a Falcon) that uses GPS and cameras to autonomously generate (among other things) highly accurate maps of the ground. The UAV is hand-launched, with an endurance of about an hour, and generally operates between 300 and 1,500 feet above the ground. It has public safety flight approvals from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to fly in some parts of Colorado. Basically, the point here is that we're not talking about some random dude with a quadrotor flying around taking pictures: the Falcons are designed for (and governmentally approved for) mapping missions in public airspace.
The National Guard probably has no knowledge of his capability, and are too busy with their rescue efforts to deal with a POSSIBLE resource.
for now, his UAVs is just an obstacle to their choppers.
If he wants to help the National Guard, fine, but now is NOT the time to approach them.
After this mess is over, THEN he can approach them, show them his videos and demonstrate his equipment.
Then they can decide how and if the UAVs can be used, and either let his men train with their crews, or sell them UAVs and train their crews in handling them.
If he utters ONE WORD about how unfair/stupid/whatever it was that he wasn't allowed to fly... Well... never Smile off a customer...
And going to a magazine to cry about this 'unfairness'... not really that good, either.
There is a steep learning curve with new technology. At this point a working device exists, but the potential customers are unaware of it capabilities and limitations. Of course one doesn't roll out new tech in the middle of a disaster. But now the discussion has started, perhaps the emergency services will begin considering possible application for next time.
Local, nobody said anything to any gov agencies (starting with the FAA) about it.
In other words, if they want you to step aside... I'd get out of the way.
I am in the Civil Air Patrol as a member . We do a Ton of ongoing training to do our SAR's as safely as any one can .
every year I have to take more FEMA classes and keep up to date on the latest * best practices* ..
Gadgetman is spot on ..
NUMBER ONE RULE !
coordination !.. this is why the ICS was developed . ( started with CALfire ect ) .
If you want to help the SAR with assets . You better come with some serious paperwork OR have a MOU with US and the other agency's.
I don't care if you are best UAV pilot on the face of this earth .... you need to follow the chain of command .