One area that unmanned aircraft are
emerging in is the area of precision agriculture. Manned aircraft whether they
are fixed wings or helicopters have been used in agriculture for an extensive
amount of time. These systems have worked great, but have not been entirely
accurate. A system that is being used to replace those manned systems is the
PrecisionHawk. Utilizing the PrecisionHawk, those choosing to use that system
can get 3D Terrain mapping, plant height, weed detection, plant counting, canopy
cover, crop health indexes, and seasonal monitoring. Doing this through a conventional means is not
always an easy task, or just simply too time consuming. When you look at big
scale agriculture, such as soy fields, utilizing an unmanned aircraft is more
practical. Because of the onboard sensors that are included with the
PrecisionHawk, things like nitrogen deficiencies or chlorophyll deficiencies,
undetectable by human sight, can be detected. The overall operating cost is
much lower, and the need for a customized manned aircraft that could do the
same, is taken out of the equation. A manned aircraft could do almost the same
thing, but would need to incorporate all of these sensors, which are not nearly
as convenient or practical as they are on a 3lb. unmanned aircraft. Corn, soybean and wheat farmers could save an
estimated $1.3 billion annually by using drones to increase crop yields and
reduce input costs. The ability to increase crop yield, and save on producing a
higher yield are just one of the many benefits that utilizing an unmanned
aircraft can provide.
Another
system that was created that provides precision agriculture was created by
Agriborix, which created the EnduroQuad. The six-pound quad-copter can fly a
lawnmower pattern over 160 acres in 20-25 minutes. The near infrared camera
that comes with this system can take 400-500 images at a resolution of 5 cm per
pixel, which is small enough to isolate an individual plant. These systems are
designed to help make recommendations for farmers. With these recommendations
the farmers can decide what areas of their crop need to be adjusted, the
overall idea is to cut down on environmental impact, reduce waste, and increase
crop yield. The overall cost benefit
that many farmers are seeing are as much as $12.00 an acre as compared to using
a manned aircraft. This overall monetary gain, along with a higher yield output
make for a great argument in why utilizing an unmanned aircraft are beneficial.
References
BETTER DATA
FORSMARTER BUSINESS DECISIONS. (n.d.). Retrieved November 30, 2015, from
http://www.precisionhawk.com/
Doering, C. (2015,
July 21). Growing use of drones poised to transform agriculture. Retrieved
November 30, 2015, from
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/money/agriculture/2015/07/21/drones-farm-savings-agriculture-millions/30486487/
Wihbey, J. (n.d.).
Agricultural drones change the way we farm - The Boston Globe. Retrieved
November 30, 2015, from https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2015/08/22/agricultural-drones-change-way-farm/WTpOWMV9j4C7kchvbmPr4J/story.html#comments
Scott E. Leishman
ASCI 637 Unmanned Aero Sys Ops & Payloads
Embry
Riddle Aeronautical University-Worldwide
One
of the largest concerns with integration as it relates to unmanned aircraft
systems (UAS) is safety. As part of the safety discussion it is important to
address the separation of unmanned aircraft systems from other unmanned
aircraft in addition to separation from manned aircraft.
“The
ability to maintain adequate separation between aircraft is a prerequisite for
the safe integration of unmanned aircraft into the National Airspace System
(NAS).While safe separation from other aircraft can generally be assured
through standard air traffic control (ATC) operations in operations under
instrument flight rules (IFR) and instrument meteorological conditions (IMC),
there will be times in which UAS may be flying under visual flight rules (VFR)
(or a corresponding designation) in which the detect, see and avoid (DSA)
capabilities are essential (McCarley, 2005).”
So this leads us to ask how can the separation
of unmanned aircraft be monitored and maintained (among other unmanned aircraft
and manned aircraft) in the NAS?
One
way to monitor and maintain separation of aircraft is through the use of air
traffic control services. The primary purpose of the ATC system is to prevent a
collision between aircraft operating in the NAS and to organize and expedite
the flow of traffic. Controllers such as myself use various tools to accomplish
this mission. One tool that is used is through the use of radio detection and
ranging or RADAR. This is a fairly straightforward approach to separation where
the air traffic controller has a RADAR scope and observes a “target” this
target is displayed as a blip on a scope which in turn simulates an aircraft,
this is called a primary target. There is also a secondary block of information
that is displayed next to the primary target which displays the aircraft’s
speed, altitude, and squawk code. Controllers use this information to separate
aircraft from known and/or observed conflicts.
While controllers often separate aircraft using this method it is not
always used, and it is not always a requirement to have air traffic control
services provided. So we must ask what other ways can we separate unmanned
aircraft from manned aircraft and other unmanned aircraft? This leads to the
discussion about DSA technology. The UAS have to be able to detect, sense, and
avoid other UAS as well as manned aircraft. One way manned aircraft are accomplishing
this is through the use of Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast (ADS-B).
From the NextGen Implementation plan of 2015 ADS-B is:
“The
more precise, satellite-based successor to radar. ADS-B Out uses GPS to
determine an aircraft’s location, airspeed and other data. It broadcasts that
information to a network of ground stations (which relays the data to air
traffic controllers) and to nearby aircraft equipped to receive the data via
ADS-B In. ADS-B In provides operators of properly equipped aircraft with
weather and traffic information delivered directly to the cockpit (Huerta,
"NextGen Implementation Plan 2015").”
Future users will be
required to be equipped with ADS-B out by 2020 but will be a requirement only
for those aircraft operating at or above 10,000 feet. This does not resolve the
conflict for aircraft operating at lower altitudes which is one of the
questions that are being asked as part of the integration process. At least 14 companies, including Google,
Amazon, Verizon and Harris, have signed agreements with NASA to help devise the
first air-traffic system to coordinate small, low-altitude drones, which the
agency calls the Unmanned Aerial System Traffic Management (Levin, July 24,2015,
para.5).
Another
technology that could be used by unmanned aircraft is the terminal collision
avoidance system (TCAS) but the problem with using this “manned” aircraft
technology is that it is much too large for use in small unmanned aircraft.
This lack of sufficient technology to cover all categories of unmanned aircraft
is troubling because we are not able to take advantage of integrating all
unmanned aircraft safely. Without the introduction of newer technologies, those
wishing to use UAS not capable of detecting, sensing, and avoiding other
aircraft, will find themselves extremely restricted under the proposed rules
regarding integration.
Alternatives
that appear to be solution include systems like Low altitude Tracking and
Avoidance System (LATAS).
“Current
aviation technology is unable to locate and track drones due to their small
size and the low altitudes at which they fly. This makes it difficult for air
traffic controllers to manage an increasing number of commercial and hobbyist
drones while maintaining the safest airspace in the world” (LATAS, “LATAS
Brings Order”, n.d., para.2)
“Operating over
the world-wide cellular networks and satellites, the LATAS (Low Altitude
Traffic and Airspace Safety) platform connects leading airspace management
technologies, such as sense and avoid, geo-fencing and aircraft tracking, into
a service package for commercial and recreational drone operators as well as
regulators and air traffic controllers (LATAS, “Say hello to LATAS”, n.d., para.1)”
This DSA need
stems from those users wishing to utilize their UAS beyond line of sight, and
having these technologies will help to allow those users to do so. Because
there is not a defined method of separation, legislature will be required to
define what technology is acceptable, and until it has done so UAS will
continue to suffer the consequences and be limited to line of sight operations
for those UAS that are unable to accommodate technology that would allow them
to operate beyond line of sight, such as TCAS, and ADS-B. Questions that still
remain to be answered will be are UAS tracked by the same equipment the FAA has
ordered traditional aircraft to install by 2020, known as ADS-B? Or will the
nation’s cellular network be adapted for UAS monitoring? Additionally will independent
recreational fliers, who are now exempt from most drone regulations, be
required to adhere to new rules? How will the system handle rogue operators who
don’t cooperate? Without answering these questions and creating sufficient
technology, advancing UAS into the future will have hindered progress.
