Author Topic: Our government wants to fly drones in US air space (Read 1084 times)

DalesCarpentry · « **on:** February 10, 2012, 06:08:29 AM »

I hate the big brother thing and it looks like we just might get a whole lot more of it. The only reason I can see them flying drones over the US is to spy on it;s own people.

Dale
http://defense.aol.com/2012/02/08/army-leads-pentagon-in-push-to-get-faa-to-ok-uavs-in-u-s/?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl1%7Csec3_lnk1%26pLid%3D134442
WASHINGTON: The Army is inviting the other armed services to join in a demonstration this summer at Dugway Proving Ground in Utah of ground-based sense-and-avoid (GBSAA) technologies that may help win Federal Aviation Administration approval of far larger numbers of military drone flights in U.S. civilian airspace.

   Mary Ottman, deputy product director for unmanned systems airspace integration concepts in the Army's UAS Project Office at Huntsville, Ala., told an Association of Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI) conference the Dugway exercise is part of a "crawl, walk, run" Army strategy for gaining FAA expansion of military access to civilian airspace for unmanned aircraft flights. The Defense Department has designated the Army the lead service in developing GBSAA systems.

   "The ultimate goal is that an unmanned aircraft system will be able to file and fly like manned aircraft systems," Ottman said.

   An FAA reauthorization bill that won final approval in Congress this week requires the FAA to develop a plan to integrate unmanned aircraft into the national airspace system (NAS) by 2015 while setting new standards for performance and safety.

   The Army in particular has a growing need for access to the NAS, Ottman said, because "we have training requirements, we have testing requirements, we have to provide defense support of civilian authorities."

   Existing law requires UAS operators to obtain a Certificate of Authorization from the FAA to fly unmanned aircraft in civilian airspace. The FAA generally requires that a manned chase plane and at least one ground observer monitor such flights to meet its "see-and-avoid" standard, under which aircraft operators must be able to visually recognize other aircraft so they can avoid collisions.

   The services are working on various GBSAA technologies in a quest to develop systems safe enough that the FAA will accept them as an alternative to its usual "see-and-avoid" requirement.

   The Army won a COA from the FAA two years ago to test a prototype GBSAA system that included ground radars at El Mirage, Calif., but suspended the experiment last year after only 11 hours of flights. Ottman said a "software glitch" had caused a halt in the flights and the Army decided to transfer its GBSAA experiments to Dugway's military airspace, where no FAA approval is needed.

Sourdough · « **Reply #1 on:** February 10, 2012, 06:20:44 AM »

Dale, the Border Patrol has requested assistance patrolling the border. Drones have been deemed a good asset to spot vehicles and groups crossing the border. the drone being high up can survey the areas leading up to the border, from inside the US side. But to get there, and to perform along the border, the drone will have to fly through and in Civil Airspace. I feel this is a good reason to fly a drone over the US.

DalesCarpentry · « **Reply #2 on:** February 10, 2012, 06:51:39 AM »

I guess I don't see a problem if it were only used to patrol the border but who knows what's going to happen when they get there foot in the door? Before you know it they are flying patrols over your house. I agree we need to stop the border jumpers but am not sure about losing another one of our freedoms to do so. Dale
PS looks like this made my 6000th post!

Nuke41 · « **Reply #3 on:** February 10, 2012, 07:28:52 AM »

Be informed:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr658enr/pdf/BILLS-112hr658enr.pdf
Read Sections 331-336, I don’t see anything nefarious in the bill.

lakota · « **Reply #4 on:** February 10, 2012, 07:53:51 AM »

Quote from: DalesCarpentry on February 10, 2012, 06:51:39 AM

I guess I don't see a problem if it were only used to patrol the border but who knows what's going to happen when they get there foot in the door? Before you know it they are flying patrols over your house. I agree we need to stop the border jumpers but am not sure about losing another one of our freedoms to do so. Dale
PS looks like this made my 6000th post!

100% right. It wouldnt be long before some government turd started to abuse the ability to fly drones in our air space...not that they arent doing it as much as they want to as we speak.

Old Fart · « **Reply #5 on:** February 10, 2012, 08:07:13 AM »

Just curious, how is this different then them flying planes overhead now?
I'm just asking, don't particularly want any of them flying over my place.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #6 on:** February 10, 2012, 08:14:22 AM »

Just think a drone commerical flight , Sealed in flight control, Hijackers would have to enter from out side the plane , hard to do at 400 MPH . No more drunk plane drivers . Guy controling drone has a medical emg. he gets up new guy takes over , the list is endless. It dosen't need be all spy stuff .

BUGEYE · « **Reply #7 on:** February 10, 2012, 11:13:27 AM »

Quote from: SHOOTALL on February 10, 2012, 08:14:22 AM

Just think a drone commerical flight , Sealed in flight control, Hijackers would have to enter from out side the plane , hard to do at 400 MPH . No more drunk plane drivers . Guy controling drone has a medical emg. he gets up new guy takes over , the list is endless. It dosen't need be all spy stuff .

dontcha' know, there's a conspiracy behind every tree.

-Shaggy- · « **Reply #8 on:** February 10, 2012, 12:04:23 PM »

Quote from: TM7 on February 10, 2012, 10:41:18 AM

Quote from: Old Fart on February 10, 2012, 08:07:13 AM
Just curious, how is this different then them flying planes overhead now?
I'm just asking, don't particularly want any of them flying over my place.
.
Potential for 30,000 applications for US drones. That would be about 600 for every county in the US of A if licensed. Drones fly silently and for what?....48 hours at a clip. Potential for Big Brother privacy and Constitutional violations goes way up exponentially. Most drones are set up for observations, intell, spying, and /or strikes. Most countrys that have drones flying overhead,,,aren't very happy about it HR658 is an adjunct to the NDAA, global battlefied act. . HR658 was very quietly passed without a peep from our crackerjack mass media...

..TM7

Where did the 30,000 number come from? (and that would be 600 for every STATE, not county)

Nuke41 · « **Reply #9 on:** February 10, 2012, 04:00:22 PM »

Quote from: TM7 on February 10, 2012, 10:41:18 AM

Potential for 30,000 applications for US drones. That would be about 600 for every county in the US of A if licensed. ..TM7

Did you even read HR 658? Before you hit the drone-pocalypse panic button you might actually want to read the bill and understand it.

mcwoodduck · « **Reply #10 on:** February 10, 2012, 05:53:19 PM »

I think the question is are the drones Armed?
There also is the Posse Comitatus and the Federal Governemnt is not allowed to use the Military as the police.
Now I have no problem is the CIA/ DEA/ FBI wants to fly the Armed Drones on the boarder or in Mexico and taking out Cartel members as a clear threat to the US.

Siskiyou · « **Reply #11 on:** February 10, 2012, 09:04:43 PM »

Drones have a real application in fighting forest fires. Typical observation flights over and fire are 4 hrs. and then a relief aircraft is launched. During real active periods the number of qualified planes and pilots are limited.
Pilots flight time and aircraft time out. During extended periods of fire activity exhaustion sets in.
During major thunderstorms more then a thousand fires will be started. Drones can help in detection of these fires using TV and heat detection technology.
Drones do not get airsick or have to set down for a potty break. They also reduce the risk to aircrews. As the sky's fill with smoke the risk level increases.

Conan The Librarian · « **Reply #12 on:** February 11, 2012, 01:15:49 AM »

They have been in common use in minnesota for years. The makers have pitched them to police agencies for such things as aerial surveillance.

Will Bison · « **Reply #13 on:** February 11, 2012, 05:00:57 AM »

From a pilots perspective, I would like to know that the operator of a UAV is at least qualified under part 61 and that the UAV can be operated under part 91. For those of us who operate aircraft the final protective line is the "See and Avoid" clause. The Bill simply lays out a time line of testing.

mcwoodduck · « **Reply #14 on:** February 11, 2012, 05:54:54 AM »

Quote from: Siskiyou on February 10, 2012, 09:04:43 PM

Drones have a real application in fighting forest fires. Typical observation flights over and fire are 4 hrs. and then a relief aircraft is launched. During real active periods the number of qualified planes and pilots are limited.
Pilots flight time and aircraft time out. During extended periods of fire activity exhaustion sets in.
During major thunderstorms more then a thousand fires will be started. Drones can help in detection of these fires using TV and heat detection technology.
Drones do not get airsick or have to set down for a potty break. They also reduce the risk to aircrews. As the sky's fill with smoke the risk level increases.

Can Drones be fitted to drop water? The preditor drones can cary a pair of 100 pound missles so can 40 gallons of water be fitted to the drones and the preditor drones cary up to 2,000 pounds of bombs and missles cna they be used to dump water on forest fires? Sorry just watched the movie Always the other week.

Siskiyou · « **Reply #15 on:** February 11, 2012, 06:21:07 AM »

http://www.firerescue1.com/fire-products/wildland-fire-products/articles/309435-NASA-Forest-Service-team-up-to-test-wildfire-drone/

This item is a very high tech, limited resource. It downlinks data and video to a van on the ground and the incident commander keep up to data on what a fire is doing. Fire fighters on the ground are often in the blind. They cannot see what is happening below them or in the next drainage. Early in my career I was on a wildfire in which 12 fire fighters were killed about a mile from my crew.

From the position of my crew and other crews on the line where I was we had short warning the fire was coming out of the bottom of the canyon. An aircraft over head with IR would have given us a better feel for what the fire was doing. The ground was to steep for dozers, but we had built and good fireline. The fire came over the top of us, and we were able to pickup the slop over. A water dropping helicopter was supporting us. The tailrotor came off the helicopter and the pilot died in the crash. The resulting fire from the crash burn another five thousand acres.
When big fires burn FF might not see sunlight for weeks.

Buck-Ridge · « **Reply #16 on:** February 15, 2012, 04:20:55 AM »

My question is why would they need a new law to fly drones around and what would they be looking for that a manned plane couldn't see? If it would cost the taxpayer less and work well I am for it.

jlchucker · « **Reply #17 on:** February 16, 2012, 09:54:27 AM »

My vertical property line is marked by the moon. If they are flying higher than that then I've got no complaint.

Cuts Crooked · « **Reply #18 on:** February 16, 2012, 10:23:11 AM »

I usually don't post links to vids, but this is interesting

http://news.yahoo.com/video/us-15749625/drones-who-is-watching-you-28326842.html

It might be ME watching you..........

BUGEYE · « **Reply #19 on:** February 16, 2012, 10:31:01 AM »

as crowded as the sky is now, if you add 30,000 drones, somebody's gonna get ran over.

Cuts Crooked · « **Reply #20 on:** February 16, 2012, 10:33:51 AM »

Just had a conversation with my wife, who told me she has seen U-tube vids done with an RC plane and a cell phone............How cool is that?

garbhead · « **Reply #21 on:** February 16, 2012, 10:34:21 AM »

"They" want it to be Dems vs Repubs or Rich vs Poor or Christians vs Moslems as in divide and conquer , but what it needs to be is "all of us" against "them".

Cuts Crooked · « **Reply #22 on:** February 16, 2012, 11:06:13 AM »

.......danged computer had to do a restart

Anyway, I just remembered sumpthin. Back in mid 70s I had an Estes model rocket that could take still photos from 500+ feet up or could take a 15 second video from launch to apogee. SO guess this drone technology isn't really that big of a jump. But that hummingbird drone is jist freakin fascinating!

AR50shooter · « **Reply #23 on:** February 16, 2012, 06:12:19 PM »

I guess I won't be skinny dippin in the pool anymore. My luck some fag would be operating the drone and play peek-a-boo. lol

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #24 on:** February 17, 2012, 02:30:54 AM »

Quote from: AR50shooter on February 16, 2012, 06:12:19 PM

I guess I won't be skinny dippin in the pool anymore. My luck some fag would be operating the drone and play peek-a-boo. lol

Think satalite , they been doing it for years

Cuts Crooked · « **Reply #25 on:** February 18, 2012, 12:37:52 PM »

Ok gang.......get yours now!

http://www.amazon.com/Parrot-AR-Drone-Quadricopter-Controlled-Android/dp/B003ZVSHB0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1329607994&sr=8-1

Kent · « **Reply #26 on:** February 19, 2012, 10:40:48 AM »

I like the idea for border patrol if in fact our government deploys "boots on the ground" to investigate what our cameras have witnessed in real time.
We have other options that don't require a fly over such as perimeter radar surveillance that would be a cheaper option once it was installed. Just think of a row of light poles about 100 yards apart. They report any pixel changes that are bigger than a jack rabbit 24/7 with 1 operator. Ground sensors could be deployed as well that would curtail any tunnel activity.