Begun-the drone wars have_MKII.

TICK..TOCK 6G - 2 months and counting??

Via the ABC News:

Quote:Drone delays air rescue of fisherman stranded on rocks in Gold Coast Seaway
By Tom Forbes
Updated about 8 hours ago
[Image: 10333842-16x9-large.jpg?v=2]
VIDEO: Seaway rocks rescue (ABC News)

Helicopter rescuers have had to wait for a drone to leave the skies above a boat accident before an injured fisherman could be winched to safety on the Gold Coast.

The 76-year-old angler was fishing in the Gold Coast Seaway around 9:00am when his boat's anchor came loose and he was washed onto the seaway's northern wall at South Stradbroke Island.

While he was just metres from dry ground, he was unable to exit the boat safely.

The Westpac Lifesaver rescue helicopter was on a training exercise in the area and landed on the seawall to assess the unfolding situation.

Crewman Tim Wilson said they were preparing to take off when they spotted a drone.

[Image: 7324504-3x2-340x227.jpg]

PHOTO: CASA rules state that drones must stay away from emergency operations. (ABC News: Nadia Daly - file image)


"We sighted a drone probably not more than 10 metres away from the helicopter, buzzing around filming everything that was going on," he said.

Quote:
"So obviously it grounded us for a little while — we didn't know where the operator was so we had to wait until they moved off before we could do anything."

While waiting for the drone to leave the area the patient remained trapped inside his aluminium runabout which was being battered by waves.

"He did get knocked around on the rocks a bit," Mr Wilson said.

"We were lucky it wasn't a life or death situation for him.

"A rescue that should have taken less than a couple of minutes made it last well over five minutes."

The fisherman suffered cuts to his legs, and pre-existing hip problems meant an aerial evacuation was the only option for rescuers.

The injured man was taken to the Gold Coast University Hospital in a stable condition.

"He was in good spirits, a bit shaken around," Mr Wilson said.

Birds and drones can take down aircraft

Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) rules regarding the use of recreational drones are clear.

The CASA website states: "You must not fly your drone over or near an area affecting public safety or where emergency operations are underway [without prior approval].

Mr Wilson said the chopper rescue crew was not prepared to risk a collision with the unmanned aircraft.

"We didn't want to put anyone else in danger, plus ourselves in the helicopter, if it had have impacted with us," he said.

"Drones are quite small, smaller than two kilos … birds are small as well and they've taken down aircraft."

He said drone operators needed to stay right away from helicopters, whether they were in the air or on the ground.

Drone registration push

CASA spokesman Peter Gibson said the incident was a close call for rescuers.
"This is an absolute textbook example of what not to do with your drone," he said.

"It is your responsibility to keep your drone away from aircraft at all times."
The pilot of the drone involved has not been found.

"A fine in this case would have been in excess of $1,000," Mr Gibson said.

He said CASA was looking at a compulsory registration scheme to help identify drone operators who breached the regulations.


MTF...P2  Dodgy
Reply

TICK..TOCK goes the drone collision clock: Part II

Via the San Diego NBC news:

Quote:Drone Operator Cited for Interfering With Shark-Bite Victim Rescue
“I would never do anything to hamper a rescue,” responds drone operator.
By Paul Krueger
Published at 7:27 PM PDT on Oct 1, 2018 | Updated at 11:08 PM PDT on Oct 1, 2018

[Image: New_Legislation_Could_Ground_Rogue_Drones.jpg]
The sheriff's department confirmed a drone interfered with an emergency rescue of a diver from a shark attack. NBC 7's Mari Payton has more on legislature that could stop these drones. (Published Monday, Oct. 1, 2018)

San Diego County Sheriff’s Department (SDSO) deputies on Saturday cited an Encinitas resident and former lifeguard for disrupting efforts to rescue a shark-bite victim.

Deputies said David Steel, 57, was flying his drone into an area reserved for a medical response helicopter.

The Sheriff’s Department said the helicopter pilot was forced to circle the landing area and delay picking up Keane Webre-Hayes, who suffered a life-threatening shark bite while diving for lobster off the Encinitas coast. 

“Several deputies saw a drone being operated in the landing zone area designated for (the helicopter),” an SDSO spokesperson told NBC 7 News. “The drone was a safety hazard, so the Fire Department Battalion Chief had to radio the helicopter to abort their landing.”

A deputy found Steel and ordered him to immediately land the unmanned aircraft. Steel complied with the command, but the deputy gave him a misdemeanor citation for violating a state law that prohibits people from flying a drone at the scene of an emergency operation.
Steel denied that his drone was anywhere near the helicopter landing area when emergency crews spotted his craft.

“It was not in the way,” Steel told NBC 7. “In a thousand years, I would never do anything to hamper a rescue.”

Steel said he was flying his Mavic drone over the ocean in the area of the shark attack, in hopes of spotting a shark. He acknowledged he may have flown the drone near the helicopter landing area when he guided it back to the ground, on orders from law enforcement.

“In hindsight, it was very poor judgment (on my part),” said Steele, who noted that he “fully complied” with the deputy’s order to immediately land his drone.

The incident highlights the challenges law enforcement faces in trying to control wayward drones that, in its view, threaten public safety.

Congress is on track to approve a new regulation that would allow the Homeland Security and Justice departments to destroy drones they consider to be security threats. 

“The threats posed by malicious unmanned aircraft are too great to ignore,” said U.S. Senator Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), chairman of the Senate’s Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. “It is not enough to just tell drone operators not to fly in certain high-risk areas; we must give federal law enforcement the authority to act if necessary.”

The National Football League (NFL) endorsed the new regulation, saying there were “about a dozen incidents” last season, in which privately-owned drones caused safety or security problems.

The NFL’s Senior Vice-President of Security also referenced to the Senate’s Homeland Security Committee May 2017 incident where a drone “flew through Petco Park in San Diego and then crashed during the seventh inning of a game between the San Diego Padres and the Arizona Diamondbacks.” 

The NFL asked the Senate committee to consider giving state and local law enforcement similar authority to disable or destroy rogue drones.In San Diego County, at least one law enforcement agency already has that technology. The Oceanside Police department has a device that can scramble radio transmission between the drone operator and the drone, and force the drone to return to its operator.

But NBC 7 Investigates found Oceanside police can’t use their “DroneKiller,” because the technology that powers the device has not been approved for use by federal regulators. 



MTF...P2  Cool
Reply

Good catch from Cap'n Wannabe off AINtv online... Wink

Quote:

OCT 3, 2018
What Happens When a Drone Hits an Airplane Wing?

With hundreds of thousands of personal UAVs currently in public hands, the question of will a serious drone strike on an aircraft occur, is no longer a matter of if, but when, in the minds of many experts. While tests on bird strikes have been conducted for decades, what kind of damage a drone would cause was still virtually unknown…until now.

Researchers at the University of Dayton research institute are no strangers to airframe impact testing, and they recently partnered with Sinclair College National UAS Training and Certification Center to determine what could happen to a general aviation aircraft if it hit a recreational drone in mid air.

If you’ve enjoyed this video, please give it a thumbs-up, share it, and subscribe to our channel.

Also, visit http://www.ainonline.com and check out our e-newsletters for all the latest on the aviation industry.

Scary stuff - TICK...TOCK goes the drone collision clock... Confused

MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply

Hopefully it happens to the PM’s plane, in or around Can’tberra, and with McDonaught, Chester and a few other arsewipes on board.

Hey, if it has to happen then it may as well happen to those (who have the legislative power) who are doing SFA about the problem.

Tick ‘crunch’ tock
Reply

From the US of A...here

Quote:Hundreds violate FAA's no drone fly zone at Balloon Fiesta

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. (KRQE) - The Balloon Fiesta is one of the most photographed events in the world. Everyone wants to get that perfect shot, but some are breaking the law to get it. KRQE News 13 explains how hundreds of people are flying their drones in restricted areas at Balloon Fiesta.

Balloons are flying high across Albuquerque's sky in this year's Fiesta -- but what else is up in the air, is raising some red flags.

This year, Balloon Fiesta hired Phoenix-based Aerial Armor to monitor the sky for drones.

"Anytime you're flying a drone there's obviously a whole slew of risks that belong with that.. [you] may lose control over a crowd of people," said Aerial Armor's operation manager Brandon Lugo. "There could be some issues with drones, so obviously a danger."

The FAA says it's forbidden to fly a drone within four miles of Fiesta Park. To find out if and where they're flying, Aerial Armor's drone detection technology is doing just that.

"At this event we are using a DJI Aeroscope System, which basically has a few different sensors that are set up around the field and monitoring radio frequency signals," said Lugo.

Aerial Armor can detect any drone within eleven miles, and any drone activity will pop up on a map.

"We have a recorded flight path of the drone, we see the home point of the operator -- that's where the person is standing -- and we basically record its entire flight," said Lugo.

Luckily for this pilot, they stayed out of the no-fly zone, but that's not the case for many of the 458 drones detected within the past few days. Almost half crossed over into the no-fly zone.

"It's kind of an eye-opening thing to see all these data where previously we weren't able to," said Lugo.

This drone detection can also identify the serial number of the drone that's breaking the rules. The company said they'll pass along their findings to the FBI and local police after Fiesta is over.

No word yet from police or the FBI if any drone pilots have gotten into trouble for flying too close to Fiesta. Flying a drone illegally can carry fines and up to five years behind bars.
Reply

Apparently some local councils are confused...here

Quote:Authorities Collide Over No-Fly Zone

THE Upper Hunter Shire Council issued a media release recently stating that “Scone is a no-fly drone zone”, however the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) has confirmed this is not strictly the case.

The Scone airport is a “non-controlled” airport, which means drones can be flown in Scone, just not directly under the flight path; a restricted area which is shown on a CASA approved phone app.

However, at a “controlled” airport, such as Tamworth, there is a 5.5 kilometer exclusion zone for drone use.

Mac Dawson, was recently contacted by local police who said they were investigating if he had illegally used a drone in Kookaburra Avenue, Scone.

“The police officer said I wasn’t allowed to be flying there because there was a 5.5 kilometre exclusion zone around the airport,” said Mr Dawson.

“But they seemed confused when I asked them if it was a controlled or non-controlled airport and they said they weren’t sure,” he said.

“I asked what prompted their investigation and they said it was ‘an official complaint from the airport’,” he said.

“I spoke to various people at the airport and they all confirmed it was a non-controlled aerodrome and I was allowed to fly in Kookaburra Street, so they were at a loss as to why there was a police investigation as well,” he said.

“In the past I’ve had Council employees tag each other on posts of my drone footage and Council operate the airport, but I don’t know in this instance who made the report to local police, only that it was ‘an official complaint from the airport’,” Mac Dawson said.

CASA explained that while state police may sometimes gather evidence and information on illegal drone use, it is CASA’s role to investigate and issue infringement notices for breaches of federal aviation law and they confirmed they were not aware of any current investigation in Scone.

The airport operator, Upper Hunter Shire Council was contacted to confirm if they had made ‘an official complaint from the airport’ to police, however they did not respond.

Ross Anderson, a pilot and managing director of Aviassist a training company for drone use, said often state government organisations are confused about drone use regulations.

“Council are not the consent authority for drones, even if they operate a local airport,” said Mr Anderson.

“Ballarat Council tried to implement their own drone rules, but the federal aviation laws overrode them and it was repealed,” he said.

“The aviation laws are federal laws not state laws and state police would only become involved in an investigation at the direction of CASA,” he said.

“There are some rare situations where police may have a role, such as during the Invictus Games there were some restrictions of drones for security at some venues and the Federal Police had a role with that,” he said.

“But the proper way to make a report if people are concerned is to CASA and there is a form on their website,” Ross Anderson said.

CASA also confirmed licenced drone operators can seek their permission to fly in restricted areas.

More information on flying drones can be found on CASA’s website: Flying Drones and Remotely Piloted Aircraft in Australia.
Reply

DAS Carmody gives industry his opinion on drone safety risk mitigation -  Rolleyes  

Reference Kharon on Avmed thread:  http://www.auntypru.com/forum/thread-17-...ml#pid9533

Quote:...Operational specialist ‘opinion’, much like that of the Rev Forsyth and specialist medical advice and that of the RRAT committee and the AOPA is being dismissed on an industrial scale; put aside as ‘opinion’ and disregarded. The end result is always that no matter how loud, how long; or, even how well informed or supported that ‘opinion’ may be; it will be arbitrarily dismissed. That demonstrable fact; stand alone should provide solid grounds for meaningful reform; alas, it does not. What it does provide is more and more money being demanded to prop up, protect and support a deeply flawed, failed, system... 


Talking of opinions I note that at the AAA conference Shane Carmody is of the opinion that drone incidents have plateaued: Reference - AA online: http://australianaviation.com.au/2018/11...aued-casa/

Quote:DRONE INCIDENTS HAVE PLATEAUED: CASA
written by Australianaviation.Com.Au November 15, 2018

[Image: DJI-drone-1.jpg?resize=750%2C420]A file image of a DJI Phantom drone.

Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) chief executive and director of aviation safety Shane Carmody says the number of incidents involving drones has levelled off amid their growing popularity.

The use of drones has boomed in recent times, not just among recreational users but also for commercial purposes such as aerial photography, search and rescue, and emergency response, to name just three from what is an ever-expanding list.

That growth has put the spotlight on regulators around the world to come up with rule sets that balance the need for drones to be used safely without putting a handbrake on innovation.

To ensure the safe operation of passenger aircraft at airports, CASA prohibits drones to be used within 3nm or 5.5km of a controlled aerodrome. They are also banned from operating on or above runways, taxiways or in the approach and departure paths of the aerodrome.

While there have been a number of incidents involving drones and aircraft around the world, Carmody says the number of reported incidents in Australia appeared to have peaked.

“When we talk about drones that the amount of safety reports on drones and aircraft interactions appear at least to me to have plateaued,” Carmody told delegates at the Australian Airports Association (AAA) national conference in Brisbane on Tuesday.

“We hope that this is at least in part due to a strong educational campaign. There is a lot more work to do and an awful lot of focus goes into this.”

“The safety issue I am hearing less than I did 12 months ago.”

The upcoming challenge will come from the potential use of larger drones as a mode of transportation, both for goods and people.

[Image: Screen-Shot-2018-08-17-at-1.18.43-pm-e15...1170%2C796]How will the drones of the future operate within controlled airspace? (Volocopter)
[size=undefined]
There are already there are trials around the world, including “Project Wing” from US-based company X that was founded by Alphabet (which owns Google) to research and develop so-called “moonshots”.

The project is trialling the delivery of food and non-prescription medicines to homes in the outer suburbs of Canberra’s Tuggeranong region.
[/size]

[Image: wall-3_1170.jpg?resize=1170%2C660]A Project Wing delivery drone test in Queanbeyan in 2017. (X)
[size=undefined]
And looking further ahead, drones are also being considered as a source of public transportation in the form of an “air taxi”, with the likes of Airbus, Boeing and Uber as well as carmakers, airlines and technology companies having projects in various stages of development.

These include trials in Canterbury in New Zealand’s south island by Kitty Hawk’s Zephyr Airworks and of flying air taxis in Dubai. Also, Rolls-Royce unveiled an electric vertical takeoff and landing (EVTOL) vehicle at the Farnborough Airshow in July.
[/size]

[Image: Cora-Hangar-Blog_1170.jpg?resize=1170%2C660]The Cora air taxi. (cora.aero)
[size=undefined]
In recent days it was reported that ride-sharing company Uber wants to start trials of its UberAir service in 2019, first in the United States and eventually in Australia.

Carmody said the world had “only scratched the surface of opportunity” when it came to drones.

“We are hearing more and more from companies trying to push this envelope,” Carmody said.

“While there is a lot to do in this area to ensure these operate safely, I can’t even begin to imagine the potential that this sort of service will unlock.
“But essentially with drones it is a brave new world.”


VIDEO: A look at Cora, the 100 per cent electric air taxi currently undergoing trials in New Zealand, from the Kitty Hawk YouTube channel.

DRONES TO ALSO IMPACT AIRSPACE DESIGN

The design of the airspace around Sydney is also being impacted by drones in addition to the construction of the Western Sydney Airport at Badgerys Creek.

“We are currently considering a different approach to the review and development of airspace architecture around the Sydney basin, especially in light of the construction of Western Sydney Airport, an identified need for change to airspace associated with Bankstown and other airspace considerations slightly further afield such as possible requirements for additional protective airspace around Tidbinbilla,” Carmody said.

“This more wholistic approach will be predicated on a more in-depth understating of airspace hazards and risks which we can only get by working collaboratively and in consultation with the community such as the those represented here.”

“I note also that by 2025, when Western Sydney Airport is supposed to be operational, which is seven years from now and if the drone forecasts of this morning was true that is another consideration that is going to have to be effectively managed at Western Sydney Airport.”

AIRSERVICES ALSO PLANNING FOR DRONES

Airservices Australia chief executive Jason Harfield told delegates at the AAA national conference any proposed drone trials from Uber – Melbourne and Sydney were floated as potential Australian trial locations – would throw up a number of issues regarding airspace.

“First and foremost is not that you might get a variety of players in that space but how do you actually integrate those operations into normal, current conventional air operations,” Harfield said during a panel discussion on Wednesday.

“Because one of the premise, particularly with Uber Elevate and some of these taxis, is actually the connectivity with the airport and so how do you integrate that.

“We are trying to look at the philosophy and looking at it as these are just a different form of helicopter.

“With the proliferation, you are not going to be able to control them in a conventional sense like we do aircraft and airlines now.”

Harfield said air traffic control had up until now been done in a “very analogue way” and the challenge would be to take advantage of new technologies to deal with the magnitude of the problem while maintaining the integrity of the system.


VIDEO: A look at Project Wing from the The Moonshot Factory’s YouTube channel.
[/size]

And for the Creepy Airport propaganda version -  Dodgy

Via the Airport Professional: https://airportprofessional.asn.au/safet...potential/

While on drones I note that the legal eagle publication Mondaq has put out a reasonable legal review of the Senate Drone Inquiry report and it's recommendations Winkhttp://www.mondaq.com/australia/x/754504...nto+drones

Quote:Australia: Flying Into The Future: Australian Senate Inquiry Into Drones
Last Updated: 14 November 2018
Article by Maurice Thompson and James M Cooper
Clyde & Co

The report was highly anticipated. During the 18 month period of consultation with operators, regulators and businesses, the eSenate Inquiry committee heard that Australia is at the forefront of drones.  Australia's aviation regulator, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), estimates there are now more than 50,000 users of recreational drones and well over 1,000 commercial operators in Australia.

It was recognised that the main challenge in establishing an effective regulatory regime for drones is to foster innovation while still balancing community concerns in relation to safety, privacy, security, and social and economic benefits.

The Senate Inquiry report recommendations are likely to lead to a suite of significant amendments to Australia's current drone regulations over the next 12 months.

Key recommendations
Among the 10 recommendations made by the Senate Inquiry committee were:
  • Recommendation 1: Immediate reform of the current regulations (Part 101 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998)

The current regulations, which commenced in September 2016, had the effect of (controversially) relaxing the rules for drones weighing less than 2kg.The Senate Inquiry committee criticised those changes on the basis that even small drones are capable of causing considerable damage to rotorcraft and aircraft.
  • Recommendation 2: Mandatory registration regime for all drones weighing more than 250 grams, together with a tiered education / training program

A compulsory registration regime in Australia would align Australia's regulations with those currently in force in jurisdictions across the world, including the US and UK where drones over 250g are required to be registered prior to flight. Currently, there is no way to identify the operator and owner of any drone involved in a near-miss incident or collision. Registration requirements of all drones would allow enforcement agencies to monitor and penalise unlawful activity.

The committee also recognised that more should be done to ensure that all drone users, whether recreational or commercial, undertake some form of mandatory education and training before flying their drones. The committee was alarmed by numerous reports of reckless drone operations which had hindered emergency operations, flown close to commercial aircrafts, or intruded upon restricted airspace. Accordingly, the committee recommended that drones users be required to undertake mandatory education and training so all operators understand the rules which will ultimately reduce the risks to public safety.
  • Recommendation 5: Development of drones-specific airworthiness standards, including mandated 'fail-safe' functions

The committee recognised that to allow drones to fully integrate into shared airspace, they must be subject to standards of airworthiness. The committee recommended that airworthiness standards should extend to drones that arrive in the country through foreign imports, similar to model rockets and laser pointers.

The committee also recommended that drones should include a number of fail-safe redundancies, such as return-to-home functionality and forced flight termination.
  • Recommendation 10: Creation of a nation-wide enforcement regime, including powers to issue on-the-spot-fines and report infringements, as part of a coordinated 'whole government policy'

In order for Australia to balance the important challenges of ensuring public and aviation safety, and encouraging innovation, the committee recommended that existing regulations be expanded to include a registration requirement, education and awareness training, additional enforcement and compliance measures, and technology-based solutions, as part of a 'whole of government' approach.The intention appears to be to move towards a drones-specific legal framework covering the breadth of issues commonly arising from drones use – safety, privacy, damage to people or property, and cyber security, among others.

Backdrop to the Senate Inquiry recommendations – where to from here?

When Australia's new drones regulations commenced in September 2016, we posed the question – how long would they last? Through those new regulations, CASA had introduced a risk-based framework for commercial drones operations, the aim being to reduce the 'red tape' for operators of drones under 2kg that are considered to be "lower risk" and thereby promote the local industry.

The Senate Inquiry committee was critical of CASA's approach.  It found that even small drones are capable of causing significant damage to aircraft, people or property, and present a safety risk that needs to be protected against.  The position recommended by the Senate committee represents a clear shift and would bring Australia's regulations closer into line with those in the UK and the US, but potentially with even more stringent requirements for operators.  

So, less than two years after Australia's current drones regulations commenced, we will now enter a period of uncertainty while a proposal for a reformed set of regulations is prepared.  CASA has indicated that a review of drones (including new registration and remote pilot accreditation requirements) is to be implemented in mid-2019.  One suspects this will be just another step in a continual period of review and change over the coming years as this era-defining technology continues to evolve.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.


MTF...P2  Cool


Ps More on the Leopard & Spots, bollocks Carmody AAA speech over on the Senate Estimates thread... Dodgy
Reply

Will CASA be the ultimate party poopers on the exploitation of drones?  Confused  

Via which-50.com... Wink

Quote:[Image: dose-media-368248-unsplash-1263x560.jpg]


The biggest challenge for drones may be regulators

Joseph Brookes/ December 18, 2018

Drones have the potential to impact several verticals, reducing costs and safety risks while also unlocking innovative new use cases. But one of the flying robots’ biggest challenges will be with regulators who, understandably, demand high levels of public safety.

However, the pace of adoption has required regulators to act quickly to develop new standards to keep up with the emergent technology.

Drone delivery is already being trialled in Australia and industries like construction and utilities use the technology to monitor remote assets. The surge in drones or remotely piloted aircraft has led to an examination of existing regulations and calls for new ones in Australia.

This year the Australian Government Civil Aviation Safety Authority conducted a review of drones which found safety was the number one concern around the rising use, both commercially and recreationally. Its recommendations included a mandatory registration system for medium and large drones, continued education and training, and deploying geofencing to exclude drones from certain areas and altitudes. 

“The most pressing, pervasive and persistent of these issues involves matters of safety, and the rational management of the risks the expanding use of RPA pose for other airspace users and for people and property on the surface,” the CASA review said, noting it will continue to consult with industry and drone users to develop new regulations.

The collaborative approach is a significant opportunity for companies to work with regulators to improve public safety and unlock the value of drones, according to Eden Attias, CEO of ASX-listed Parazero, a company that sells safety solutions for aerial systems, including drones.

Attias told Which-50 the surge in drone use and the potential value of the technology had left drone regulation in a “state of flux”.

“Regulators recognise the commercial value that drones offer to both private enterprise and government organisations,” Attias said.

[Image: eden-Attias.jpeg]

Eden Attias, CEO and chairman of Parazero

“The original regulations did much to stifle widespread commercial adoption and truly innovative use cases, but this is slowly changing. Regulators around the world are now working with the drone industry to find solutions that continue to maintain public safety while at the same enabling this nascent technology to realise its full potential.”

Attias says regulations, along with safety and security are the key challenges to drones becoming more viable. “Drone jacking” is a real threat, Attias says, where valuable drones and their payloads are commandeered by third parties.

“Regulators around the world are now working with the drone industry to find solutions that continue to maintain public safety while at the same enabling this nascent technology to realise its full potential,” Attias said.

The potential of drones

Attias has little doubt about the potential of drones, telling Which-50, “Drones are such a disruptive technology that they will make a huge impact across all verticals.”

More obvious examples are the increasingly common aerial photography and filming, as well as the possibility of retailers delivering goods via air drops. But the value businesses are perhaps most excited about is maintenance and safety.

“We’re now seeing drones play a massive role in asset monitoring across oil and gas, energy, telecommunications and public infrastructure, as they are able to perform hazardous work and are cost-effective over wide areas,” Attias said.

One particularly innovative use case involves the telecommunication industry. According to Attias, drones are now being used to do much of the work that human tower climbers do, saving on labour and improving the safety of a notoriously dangerous task.

“Tower climbing has been recognised as one of the most hazardous jobs in the world.

Nowadays, drones are being used to inspect the towers, capture live images and data, and send it to the telco automatically.

“In addition to saving lives, drones can carry out routine audits and inspections faster than they would have been done manually. The data captured by the drones is usually more reliable.”

MTF...P2  Cool
Reply

Drones the new passive terrorism tool?  Undecided

Via the Oz: https://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/wo...02aa1986e3

Quote:Chaos as drones cause Gatwick Airport closure

JACQUELIN MAGNAY
FOREIGN CORRESPONDENT
@jacquelinmagnay

AN HOUR AGO DECEMBER 21, 2018
57 COMMENTS


[Image: 314ae6bab5e73cb9509e17b5cc21afe8?width=650]

Police believe the drone activity, involving at least two drones, is deliberate and are investigating if it is a co-ordinated attack. Picture: iStock

The British government has called in the military to destroy a drone that is being deliberately flown over Gatwick Airport’s runway in what has been called an act of sabotage.

Hundreds of thousands of passengers have been caught up in the unprecedented security and safety breach as Gatwick Airport remains closed.

The Ministry of Defence has confirmed it has sent specialist equipment to Gatwick to try and deal with the drone. Military experts are trying to jam the communications system being used to pilot the drone and could use a laser to try and dismantle it.

More than 18 hours after the drone was first spotted at 9pm Wednesday evening, Gatwick Airport remains closed. Every time the airport gears up to re-open, the drone reappears.

Gatwick chief executive Stewart Wingate says the drone activities are highly targeted and have been designed to close the airport and bring maximum disruption in the run up to Christmas

Nearly 800 flights have been diverted or cancelled from the airport, which is Britain’s second busiest, leaving distraught families trying to get home for Christmas.

Several plane loads of children heading for Lapland have been cancelled.

[Image: 28bb581adaa4db2975775b189005bf24?width=650]
An information board announces flight disruption at Gatwick Airport. Picture: AFP.

”How do I tell my five year old she isn’t going to see Santa after all,’’ one upset mother said.

The Palmer family told BBC that they had planned a trip to Lapland trip as a surprise for their young children with three generations excited, but have now had to head back home.

Government officials and the police believe the chaos, which has impacted more than 110,000 people, was deliberate and the work of professionals. Previously inadvertent use of drones near British airports — where the unmanned aircraft is flown more than 100m high or within a kilometre of an airfield- is dealt with swiftly and there is little interruption.

However this drone appears to be highly sophisticated and experts have said it could be operated from several hundred kilometres away. Others say it could have been modified to allow it to fly for more than the usual 15 to 20 minutes of battery time.

Sussex police have sighted the drone several times during the day, including just minutes before the airport was due to be reopened at 3pm, but have been unable to get a clear safe shot.

More than 10,000 passengers have been stranded at the airport, unable to board their flights to Europe, America or Asia.

Easy Jet said it was cancelling all flights from Gatwick on Thursday and other airlines were expected to follow suit.

Other airports in Britain have had their night-time curfews lifted to try and ease some of the disruption.

Transport secretary Chris Grayling said: “It’s pretty clear that this is a fairly large drone, not the classic plastic garden drone. “This is a commercial sized drone that is clearly being operated deliberately in a way that when Gatwick tries to reopen the runway the drone reappears, so this is clearly a deliberate act.”

He warned the drone operators that there was a five year jail sentence awaiting and that “anyone who does this should expect to go to jail for many years’’.

He added that there was no suggestion that the action was a terrorist act.

’’It is clearly someone who wants to disrupt Gatwick Airport,’’ he said.

[Image: 67b332296b38ea3e9bf783e575326c1b?width=650]
Passengers wait for news at the North Terminal with Gatwick remaining closed. Picture: AFP.

Drones shut down Gatwick Airport

Police were still hunting drones and their operators last night after the Christmas plans of thousands of families were thrown into chaos when Gatwick Airport was forced to close.

The drones had been seen flying near Britain’s second-busiest airport on Wednesday night and yesterday morning, in what some believe could be a deliberate and co-ordinated attack.

The operators face five years in jail, as drones are banned from being flown within a kilometre of the airport boundary. A drone could bring down an aircraft and cause massive loss of life if it is sucked into an engine.

More than 10,000 passengers already have been affected by the plane cancellations and the disruption is set to last for days, raising fears that many families will be unable to get to family Christmas gatherings.

The airport said there would be days of delays even when the airport was reopened, because planes and staff would not be where they were scheduled to be.

When the drones were first spotted on Wednesday night near the Gatwick runway, some passengers were left stranded on planes for up to seven hours. Nearby hotels were full and people slept on the Gatwick terminal floor.

Flights due to arrive in Gatwick were diverted throughout yesterday to other airports including Amsterdam, Paris and Bordeaux. Some flights have made it to Britain­, but landed at Cardiff, Liver­pool, Manchester, Stansted, Luton and Birmingham.

Gatwick chief operating officer Chris Woodroofe said 2000 flights had been grounded.

He said the vast majority of the 110,000 passengers due to pass through Gatwick on Thursday — one of the busiest travel days of the year — would experience disruption.

“We also have the helicopter up in the air but the police advice us that it would be dangerous to seek to shoot the drone down because of what may happen to the stray bullets,’’ he said.

The runway was ­initially closed about 9pm on Wednesday after two reported sightings of drones. It briefly ­reopened at 3am but closed again when the small remote-controlle­d aircraft were spotted above the airfield again.

“We are advising passengers scheduled to fly from Gatwick not to travel to the airport without checking the status of their flight with their airline this morning,’’ Gatwick said in a statement. “We apologise for the inconvenience, but the safety of all passengers and staff is our first priority.”

WITH THE TIMES


MTF...P2 

P7 – (butts in) - “K” has the right of it. Purdy rules – OK.



Cool
Reply

(12-21-2018, 07:26 AM)Peetwo Wrote:  Drones the new passive terrorism tool?  Undecided

Via the Oz: https://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/wo...02aa1986e3

Quote:Chaos as drones cause Gatwick Airport closure

JACQUELIN MAGNAY
FOREIGN CORRESPONDENT
@jacquelinmagnay

AN HOUR AGO DECEMBER 21, 2018
57 COMMENTS


[Image: 314ae6bab5e73cb9509e17b5cc21afe8?width=650]

Police believe the drone activity, involving at least two drones, is deliberate and are investigating if it is a co-ordinated attack. Picture: iStock

The British government has called in the military to destroy a drone that is being deliberately flown over Gatwick Airport’s runway in what has been called an act of sabotage.

Hundreds of thousands of passengers have been caught up in the unprecedented security and safety breach as Gatwick Airport remains closed.

The Ministry of Defence has confirmed it has sent specialist equipment to Gatwick to try and deal with the drone. Military experts are trying to jam the communications system being used to pilot the drone and could use a laser to try and dismantle it.

More than 18 hours after the drone was first spotted at 9pm Wednesday evening, Gatwick Airport remains closed. Every time the airport gears up to re-open, the drone reappears.

Gatwick chief executive Stewart Wingate says the drone activities are highly targeted and have been designed to close the airport and bring maximum disruption in the run up to Christmas

Nearly 800 flights have been diverted or cancelled from the airport, which is Britain’s second busiest, leaving distraught families trying to get home for Christmas.

Several plane loads of children heading for Lapland have been cancelled.

[Image: 28bb581adaa4db2975775b189005bf24?width=650]
An information board announces flight disruption at Gatwick Airport. Picture: AFP.

”How do I tell my five year old she isn’t going to see Santa after all,’’ one upset mother said.

The Palmer family told BBC that they had planned a trip to Lapland trip as a surprise for their young children with three generations excited, but have now had to head back home.

Government officials and the police believe the chaos, which has impacted more than 110,000 people, was deliberate and the work of professionals. Previously inadvertent use of drones near British airports — where the unmanned aircraft is flown more than 100m high or within a kilometre of an airfield- is dealt with swiftly and there is little interruption.

However this drone appears to be highly sophisticated and experts have said it could be operated from several hundred kilometres away. Others say it could have been modified to allow it to fly for more than the usual 15 to 20 minutes of battery time.

Sussex police have sighted the drone several times during the day, including just minutes before the airport was due to be reopened at 3pm, but have been unable to get a clear safe shot.

More than 10,000 passengers have been stranded at the airport, unable to board their flights to Europe, America or Asia.

Easy Jet said it was cancelling all flights from Gatwick on Thursday and other airlines were expected to follow suit.

Other airports in Britain have had their night-time curfews lifted to try and ease some of the disruption.

Transport secretary Chris Grayling said: “It’s pretty clear that this is a fairly large drone, not the classic plastic garden drone. “This is a commercial sized drone that is clearly being operated deliberately in a way that when Gatwick tries to reopen the runway the drone reappears, so this is clearly a deliberate act.”

He warned the drone operators that there was a five year jail sentence awaiting and that “anyone who does this should expect to go to jail for many years’’.

He added that there was no suggestion that the action was a terrorist act.

’’It is clearly someone who wants to disrupt Gatwick Airport,’’ he said.

[Image: 67b332296b38ea3e9bf783e575326c1b?width=650]
Passengers wait for news at the North Terminal with Gatwick remaining closed. Picture: AFP.

Drones shut down Gatwick Airport

Police were still hunting drones and their operators last night after the Christmas plans of thousands of families were thrown into chaos when Gatwick Airport was forced to close.

The drones had been seen flying near Britain’s second-busiest airport on Wednesday night and yesterday morning, in what some believe could be a deliberate and co-ordinated attack.

The operators face five years in jail, as drones are banned from being flown within a kilometre of the airport boundary. A drone could bring down an aircraft and cause massive loss of life if it is sucked into an engine.

More than 10,000 passengers already have been affected by the plane cancellations and the disruption is set to last for days, raising fears that many families will be unable to get to family Christmas gatherings.

The airport said there would be days of delays even when the airport was reopened, because planes and staff would not be where they were scheduled to be.

When the drones were first spotted on Wednesday night near the Gatwick runway, some passengers were left stranded on planes for up to seven hours. Nearby hotels were full and people slept on the Gatwick terminal floor.

Flights due to arrive in Gatwick were diverted throughout yesterday to other airports including Amsterdam, Paris and Bordeaux. Some flights have made it to Britain­, but landed at Cardiff, Liver­pool, Manchester, Stansted, Luton and Birmingham.

Gatwick chief operating officer Chris Woodroofe said 2000 flights had been grounded.

He said the vast majority of the 110,000 passengers due to pass through Gatwick on Thursday — one of the busiest travel days of the year — would experience disruption.

“We also have the helicopter up in the air but the police advice us that it would be dangerous to seek to shoot the drone down because of what may happen to the stray bullets,’’ he said.

The runway was ­initially closed about 9pm on Wednesday after two reported sightings of drones. It briefly ­reopened at 3am but closed again when the small remote-controlle­d aircraft were spotted above the airfield again.

“We are advising passengers scheduled to fly from Gatwick not to travel to the airport without checking the status of their flight with their airline this morning,’’ Gatwick said in a statement. “We apologise for the inconvenience, but the safety of all passengers and staff is our first priority.”

WITH THE TIMES


P7 – (butts in) - “K” has the right of it. Purdy rules – OK.

Cool

Update:

Quote:Airport drone attacks ‘inevitable’
[Image: 746082c43d10dff6dee6434f77a3eebd]DAVID SWAN

After Gatwick’s shutdown, Australian airports are being warned they need to prepar­e for a drone attack.


Australian airports need to prepar­e for the inevitable reality of a drone attack, according to the boss of ASX-listed drone defence company Department 13.

The warning comes after a drone caused chaos at Britain’s Gatwick Airport, with flights halted for more than 24 hours and disrupting the travel plans of more than 120,000 passengers.

Police have received more than 50 reports of a drone being flown near Gatwick’s airfield, with the airport closed for the foreseeable future as authorities pursue whoever is responsible.

Department 13 chief executive Jonathan Hunter told The Weekend Australian his company had approached Gatwick with an anti-drone solution more than 12 months ago, an offer the airport did not take up.

“In November last year, we approach­ed Gatwick with a propos­al for counter UAS (unmanne­d aerial system) and suppor­t. They didn’t procure systems … and this incident now is not the first time it has happened.

“This is the third or fourth time Gatwick has had a drone shut down the airport. This shouldn’t be a surprise to people who operate airports — this is a significant regular event now that people need to take seriously.”

Mr Hunter said while there was no 100 per cent foolproof way to prevent drone incidents, an anti-drone system was a must-have for every airport.

“A $500 drone in this case is going to cost Gatwick Airport and the UK government hundreds of millions of dollars,” he said. “This individual is not believed to be a hobbyist — this is an organised threat to shut down the commerc­e of an airport.

“This is a crystal ball into what can happen in Australia or anywhere. If you shut down air traffic, the impact is incredible. People need to take notice.”

He said his company’s anti-drone methods were software-based, meaning they did not jam an airport’s communication system­s, unlike technology from rival companies.

Mr Hunter said each time a company released a new drone, his company reverse-engineered the radio frequency, and added it to the library of drones its technol­ogy, MESMER, was then able to intercept. He said MESME­R could pick up multiple drones simultaneously without human intervention.

Earlier this year, Venezuelan authorities said two drones, laden with plastic explosives, were part of a failed assassination attempt on the country’s President Nicolas Maduro.

Other airports shut down by drones include Dubai in Sep­tember and Wellington last month.

“Drones are coming. They’re not going away,” Mr Hunter said. “There will be a drone economy, and we need to prepare ourselves for protection within that.”

Gatwick Airport was contacted for comment.

Meanwhile in Dunceunda land... Dodgy

Quote:New regulations for drone activity
[Image: 380ecafbcb9bbfc4e0b970f6acda3952]EMILY RITCHIE

Australia’s civil aviation authority will crack down on drone operators next month with a new suite of highly accurate surveillance technologies and tougher safety regulations to counter growing safety concerns about their use.

The crackdown was planned before London’s Gatwick Airport was forced to shut down for 36 hours last week when it was ­buzzed by drones. About 1000 flights were cancelled or diverted, and thousands of travellers left stranded over the busy festive ­season.

The Gatwick drones were ­initially suspected to have been flown by a couple who lived in nearby Crawley — Elaine Kirk, 54, and Paul Gait, 47 — but they were release­d without charge last night after police questioning.

Peter Gibson from Australia’s Civil Aviation Safety Authority said the rapid evolution of drone technology and capabilities, ­coupled with increasing affordability, created the need for an immediate upgrade to the way their use was monitored and managed.

New monitoring technology that can identify the serial number of a drone and locate where the device controller is on the ground, as well as a mandatory accredit­ation process complete with online exam for recreational drone flyers, will be implemented across the country from next month.

“While London’s incident was not the catalyst for our changes, it is certainly timely,” Mr Gibson told The Australian. “There’s a lot more people flying drones now and with that comes the risk that some people will fly them in­appropriately.”

In January, CASA is rolling out new drone surveillance technol­ogy and will conduct live monitoring services at major airports before co-ordinating random drone safety checks across the country. “We will be able to see what type of drones are being used, where, how often and obviou­sly identify if they’re being used incorrectly,” Mr Gibson said.

“The technology allows you to identify where the drone is in the sky, where the controller is on the ground and in most cases also tells us the serial number of the drone. This way we can far more easily ­locate who is flying the drone and, if they’re in breach of the rules, we can issue a penalty on the spot.”

He said CASA would target known hot spots, including ­Sydney Harbour, and would be able to identify new areas of high-density drone use.

A new registration and accreditation scheme for recreational drone flyers, set to be introduced by the middle of next year, would also help prevent a mass aviation disruption in Australia similar to Gatwick’s, Mr Gibson said.

“People purchasing drones will be required to register with us so we have information about who is flying drones, and as part of that process you’ll be required to look at some educational material and do an online test to show you’ve got an understanding of the rules,” Mr Gibson said.

“This will give us information on who is actually flying drones and enable us to directly push ­educational material so they’re aware of the rules.”

Only one drone manufacturer currently requires customers to complete an online quiz based on CASA regulations before purchase, whereas other suppliers issue information at the point of sale, which directs them to the drone-flyer website.

Current regulations include not being able to fly closer than 30m to other people, not within 5.5km of an airport and not higher than 400ft. Penalties include fines of up to $10,000 for serious offences, such as creating a safety ­hazard to an aircraft, which can also land someone behind bars for up to five years.

Mr Gibson said CASA had ­issued 63 fines over drone use this year, most of which were referred to it by state police, but he expected far more fines to be issued once the technology is rolled out.

“The message for everyone getting a drone this Christmas is that safety is important, make sure you know the rules and follow them, but also these new measures are coming and so if you do use a drone inappropriately, your chances of being caught are about to ­increase dramatically.”

MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply

I was born under a ‘Wondering’ star.


In less time than it takes to talk to human at a Telco; or even a CAsA Avmed person; over the telephone you can order a drone and have it delivered – almost as fast as the local Pizza delivery scooter (by a masked man). By the time a government department of any ilk gets off it’s arse and makes some new rules; those who intend to disrupt or conduct nefarious activities will be at least two years, in real terms; and, light years ahead the plodding, ineffectual rules dreamed up, before there is even ‘boots on the ground’ to police those rules.

We did, at great expense, pay for a Senate crew to take a ‘look-see’. Can someone, any one, please tell me what we got for that great expenditure? When an A 380 is confronted, on short final into Melbourne of Sydney, by a drone of a significant weight, can any one of our ‘leaders’ please explain why this is allowed to happen? – We can easily define the ‘how’. What I’d like to know is when, FDS, they will get a grip and stop anything remotely like from happening - again?

Technology at Mach 1.5; government still learning how to light fires by rubbing two sticks together. Value for money – I think not.

Now then, happy hour is value for money and it is the evening of the greatest fairy tale ever told, to the delight of retailers – particularly those who flog drones – and the quick answers to the very threatening CAsA ‘knowledge’ test. It’s all a bit like Jack the Ripper saying he will be a good boy - honest. Bloody pathetic.

As stated – Happy hour rules; at least if a 2 Kg drone pops through my windscreen as I become visual after10,000 feet of cloud and ice I can at least know and take comfort from the fact the government is – ‘working-on-it’. Bloody marvellous.

Yes please; same again– hell’s bells – tomorrow could be interesting.
(Rousing chorus following – here at BRB HQ.)

Drone free, as free as Carmody’s wind blows
As free as his ass flows;
Drone free - to follow his farts – etc.


Plonker…………………I can only listen to the first minute normally; but, the 'boy's have made it hilarious.  Rock-on the BRB choir.  Merry Christmas - ya' all.

Reply

THE DRONE WARS....EPISODE 7, ‘THE NEUTERING OF GATWICK’.

Back in and around 2012/13 before the major drone wars had begun, the bad guys had planned to fit out drones with C4 and fly them into parked passenger aircraft at Heathrow. Don’t bother googling it as you won’t find it, but it’s true. It never eventuates, but the minds of those who actively seek to hurt us were in full swing.

In August this year we had an attempted assassination of the Venezuelan El Presidente by drones loaded with explosives (link below);

https://www.theverge.com/2018/8/17/17703...las-maduro

Now we have had a sustained 3 day nuisance attack on a major UK airport that has caused chaos and the loss of hundreds of millions of dollars in pounds as a result. And by whom? Some still say a possible terrorist organisation, some say potentially it was a couple of middle-aged fatties with an axe to grind. Either way, the police, military and Governmental powers were effectively neutered, left vulnerable, left incapable of neutralising the threat, which has left them with egg covering their smug faces.

For the armchair observer, this incident should ring effing great big alarm bells. This incident has highlighted how vulnerable every airport is to a sneak attack, as well as other infrastructure. In the land of Oz, we have dross like Peter Dutton pushing through draconian security rules that are forcing airports, and the public, to have to tend with body scanners, upgraded security equipment, ASIC cards, increased regulatory audits and outlandish security regulations and scrutiny, and for what? Some chump(s) with their $500 drones can create havoc and mischief at an airport near you. Worse, the bad guys can load a dozen drones with explosives and fly them under the noses of even the best equipped military units and fly them into some parked, taxiing or flying aircraft quicker than it takes a Minister to say ‘Trough’! Done, dusted, carnage and death on the 6 o’clock news.

I don’t know which country will get to earn the title of ‘First Widebody Aircraft Brought Down By A Drone’, but the clock is clicking and it isn’t slowing down......

Tick Tock CAsA and Miniscule
Reply

Merry Christmas back attchya – Well said, small, strange, fur covered, super – dooper, chip stealing, much appreciated, BRB legend and espionage operative. Like the Goose in Foot Rot Flats, never let Wal relax – not for a moment.  Cheers mate.
Reply

From the Oz a couple of days ago..

Quote:Flights suspended at Heathrow Airport over drone sighting

Heathrow airport, the main transport hub into Britain, shut one of its two runways for more than 90 minutes this morning following the sighting of a drone, causing delays and a huge backlog of flights.

Hundreds of passengers who had planned to fly out of London to Australian cities in the usual evening exodus are experiencing major delays in their travel as the airport strives to get flights away before the evening curfew.

In what appears to be a copycat manoeuvre of the chaos that closed Gatwick airport for three days on the eve of the Christmas period, a drone was reported just after 5pm local time (4am AEDT) on Tuesday evening. By 6.30pm the airport had resumed take offs following an assessment by the Metropolitan Police, which included a low level search of the airfield by a helicopter.

Transport Minister Chris Grayling said he was in contact with the Home Office and Defence and said the military was rapidly deploying anti-drone equipment that was used at Gatwick.

But the incident has raised serious questions about Britain’s defensive capabilities against the drones.

While the police investigated the drone sighting, Heathrow suspended take offs on the northern runway but allowed some departures while also seeking to divert air traffic to try and minimise disruption.

The airport apologised for the inconvenience and said it was working with the Metropolitan Police to ensure safety.

Some flights had been sitting on the tarmac for more than an hour before the airport officially announced it was closing the runway and planes began to bank up at the gates and surrounding tarmac.

A British Airways passenger Lauren Doherty tweeted that a helicopter had come and gone and they had been told they would be updated once a police assessment has been completed.

Katy Hamilton tweeted: ‘’Sat on the tarmac at Heathrow due to another DRONE incident ffs… Who even are these drone losers….’’

The drone scare comes a day after the British government extended the drone exclusion zone around airports from one kilometre to five kilometres following the Gatwick chaos. No one has been arrested for the Gatwick drone incursions and the Sussex police have come under criticism for suggesting there many not have been any drone activity.

This time the specialist resources of the Metropolitan Police were immediately called in to investigate the Heathrow drone.

Heathrow airport tweeted: ‘’We are responding to a drone sighting at Heathrow and are working closely with the Met Police to prevent any threat to operational safety. As a precautionary measure, we have stopped departures while we investigate. We apologise to passengers for any inconvenience this may cause.’’

Flight radar showed that some flights had begun to take off around 6.30pm however airport staff have warned there will be ongoing delays for the rest of the evening.
Reply

New drone regs for Canada from 1 July 2019..

Quote:Ottawa sets new rules for drones, including mandatory registration


The federal government is imposing a series of new restrictions on the use of drones, requiring operators to be at least 14 years old and calling on all owners to register their recreational and commercial devices with Transport Canada, federal and industry officials said.

The new, more stringent rules, covering drones that weigh less than 25 kilograms, will be unveiled on Wednesday. They will also include an obligation for drone users to undergo online training and to inscribe a federal registration number on their devices, the officials said.

The announcement will come after a series of drone sightings led to runway closings and hundreds of cancelled flights at Gatwick and Heathrow airports in Britain in recent weeks. Airport authorities fear that drones could damage a plane in flight or cause a deadly crash after being sucked into a plane’s engine.

The officials said the new rules for drone use in Canada will include restrictions on their use within nine kilometres of airports. The three officials were granted anonymity because they were not authorized to publicly discuss the new rules before they were formally announced in the Canada Gazette.

One of the biggest associations of drone operators in the country, Unmanned Systems Canada (USC), has been working with the government to develop the new rules for nearly a decade.

“The industry has been waiting for this a long time,” said USC chair Mark Aruja. “It’s going to be good for business, good for investors and, in this case, it’s going to be really good for safe operations.”

Police forces and government agencies such as forestry services regularly use thousands of drones to help them conduct law-enforcement operations or to monitor forest fires. On the business side, energy companies use drones to inspect pipelines while farmers use them to monitor livestock.

Mr. Aruja said that professional operators of drones will easily adapt to the new regulations. He predicted the government will face a bigger challenge in ensuring that recreational users comply with the new rules and understand how to apply them in practice.

Transport Minister Marc Garneau will announce the new rules in Montreal on Wednesday. He started imposing temporary measures two years ago to address a growing number of reported drone incidents across the country.

At the time, there had already been concerns over cases in which people flew drones over forest fires in British Columbia, forcing the grounding of water bombers. In other cases, seaplane and helicopter operations in Vancouver's Coal Harbour were halted because of drones flying overhead.

“The government certainly doesn’t want to restrict drones so much that we hinder innovation because it’s so important to our economy and standard of living,” Mr. Garneau said in 2017. “But, like any new technology, drones must be used with care. And we cannot wait until something bad happens before we act.”
Reply

Off the WSJ via the Oz:

Quote:Drone ID systems unveiled
  • By ANDY PASZTOR

  • THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

  • 1:47PM JANUARY 14, 2019

[Image: 5910a3c00f7104d81d1605d3cdb7e483?width=650]
A Wing delivery drone in action. Picture: Bloomberg

Google’s Wing unit and two other companies say they have demonstrated a novel system to identify airborne drones, potentially paving the way towards expanded commercial uses of unmanned aircraft.

The concept, tested in December near San Francisco, is aimed at tracking different types of drones using disparate software applications linked by a common web-based system. By sharing such data, the companies say the location of drones and identity of operators can be captured easily on laptops and digital devices simultaneously.

Under the concept, operators, government agencies and individual citizens would have access to the data.

The recent test results are expected to provide momentum for proposed package delivery to consumers and many other drone uses currently stalled by regulatory hurdles. US air-safety and law-enforcement officials have baulked at approving extensive commercial drone operations without reliable identification techniques.

In addition to Wing, which is slated to demonstrate fledgling-package delivery procedures in Virginia this year, the flights included drone-service companies AirMap and Kittyhawk. With three of the burgeoning industry’s leading companies backing the approach and promising to step up testing, proponents hope to persuade the Federal Aviation Administration to loosen flight restrictions before completion of fully fledged rule making expected to take years.

The FAA previously said the rules would be designed to keep other aircraft and people on the ground safe. “We have to get this right the first time,” a spokesman said late last year. “We are moving as quickly as possible to address the complex issues” related to airborne identification.

“Today, we already have solutions built by industry” that are able to “solve a large chunk of the problem”, said James Ryan Burgess, chief executive of Wing. He said such an open network promised to be “most comprehensive, quickest to market and the best user experience”.

Icons update locations on a map, and faster drones are depicted with a red line indicating their routes. AirMap, a closely held San Francisco company, has developed a complementary application, which it also plans to market.

The demonstration showed the identification system could be deployed without new industry or government infrastructure, said Ben Marcus, the company’s chairman and co-founder.

The recent moves are among various pilot projects under way to study the feasibility of widespread drone operations. One advantage of a common network, according to proponents, is reduced costs for both drone companies and government.
MTF...P2  Cool
Reply

DRONE WARS - THE AIRPORT MENACE

So as of 2019 where do we sit drone wise? Well, CAsA continue to be left behind the tines, Drone attacks and interferences are getting worse, and all the Big R Regulator can do is sprout endless loads of pony Pooh, piffle, folly, and waffle fro the mouth of the bearded Peter Gobs’full’of’shite.

Just recently in the past few days a basic drone was used as a weapon;

Drone attack in the past few days;

And of course there was the attempted assasination of the Venezuelan President last year with a Drone also.

And from the GayBC today;

https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2019-01-2...s/10705786

So, no surprise, Government legislation prevents Airports from using frequency jamming technology which could improve safety. It’s becoming painfully obvious how easy it would be to fly a drone loaded with explosives into aircraft parked at an airport, or while they are taxiing, or during take their off roll or while they are landing.

TICK TOCK Miniscule
Reply

Next the Boeing autonomous flying car takes 1st flight?

Via the WP: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/...26afc8877b

Quote:Boeing’s self-driving air taxi completes first test flight



[Image: XE3IUA3ULFH5ZA2TWIQNCMRSXM.jpg]
Boeing's autonomous passenger air vehicle at a recent flight test in Manassas, Va. (Boeing) (Hand-out)

By Aaron Gregg
January 23 at 9:50 AM

An early prototype of Boeing’s self-driving air taxi completed its first flight at an airfield in Manassas, Va., on Tuesday, marking what could be an early breakthrough in the company’s vision for autonomous, on-demand flight.

The aircraft successfully took off, hovered and landed, all of which employed its autonomous navigation and landing systems, according to a release published Wednesday by the Chicago-based aerospace giant. The test marks an early milestone for Boeing’s Manassas-based Aurora Flight Sciences subsidiary, which it acquired in 2017 for a sum that wasn’t disclosed.

“This is what revolution looks like, and it’s because of autonomy,” John Langford, president and chief executive of Aurora Flight Sciences, said in a statement. “Certifiable autonomy is going to make quiet, clean and safe urban air mobility possible.”

The 30-foot-long plane has a wingspan of 28 feet, with vertical rotors designed to let it hover or fly forward for up to 50 miles. Next, the company will test the aircraft’s ability to fly forward.

The vehicle is part of a Boeing research-and-development division called NeXt, which works with technologists and government regulatory agencies to plan the eventual introduction of self-piloting air vehicles. In 2019, the company plans to test-fly an unmanned cargo plane that is designed to carry up to 500 pounds.

It’s all part of a broader effort to relieve traffic in congested cities as the company seeks to “usher in a future of safe, low-stress mobility in cities and regions around the world,” Boeing NeXt General Manager Steve Nordlund said in the company’s announcement.

Boeing is not the only company trying to build self-driving taxis: UPS, Intel and Airbus also have autonomous-flight units of their own.


MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply

From the Oz..

Quote:Drone crash probed

As technology advances, so does the scope of investigations carried out by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau.

In the past 10 years, the bureau has investigated eight events involving remotely piloted aircraft, from a total of 203 incidents reported, 38 classed as “serious”.

In the latest investigation, the ATSB is examining the crash of an X200 ScanEagle unmanned aircraft system near Woleebee Creek on Queensland’s Western Downs on January 9.

Operated by Boeing subsidiary Insitu Pacific, the UAS was being used to check wells and pipelines for the Queensland Gas Company from a $5 million launch pad overlooking Woleebee Creek.

Sporting a 3m wingspan, 5.5 litre fuel tank and 16-hour flight time capability, the drone was fitted with a $300,000 camera with a zoom lens capable of reading gauges on coal-seam gas wells from a distance of 500m.

First trialled in 2016, the American military technology can even spot methane leaks with the aid of infra-red equipment.

According to the ATSB, the January 9 crash occurred after the ScanEagle displayed airspeed abnormalities and then stalled.

It recovered but the airspeed issues continued and a second stall resulted in the collision which destroyed the device. No one was hurt.

An ATSB spokesman said the investigation would help expand the bureau’s knowledge of operations and the technical failures involving large unmanned aircraft systems, to help frame future investigative decisions.

As part of the investigation, the ATSB will interview the pilots and other crew.

It will review video footage, obtain technical data and inspect records.

A final report is expected by mid-year.
Reply

“Engage brain before opening gob”

TOM’s mantra, often uttered just before I was allowed to sit in on grown-up conversations. Time has proven it to be sound advice. Reason I mention it is the latest round of discussion on ‘Drones’ is due and it is a very big subject which probably deserves some serious thought before taking up a position.

In pimus; what should we be not be concerned about? Licenced operators with trained ‘pilots’ is a no brainer. Professional and commercial operators, from the Surf Life Savers to a pipeline survey company are; barring ‘accidents’ unlikely to cause anyone heartburn. Farmers out on the land are an equally a ‘low-risk’ crowd. In fact anyone out in a remote area, aware of the rules is unlikely to create havoc. Registered, ‘chipped’ drones, in the hands of responsible adults are probably in the very lowest risk category; and, the easiest fix. – IMO.

In Secundus there is ‘City’ operations – delivery services and the like. Great idea, reduce road traffic, reduce costs, improved customer service etc. However; no matter how well trained, licensed and registered the operations are; there remain a couple of wrinkles to be ironed out. For example – engine failure. Aircraft engines are rigorously maintained to an exceptionally high standard, by highly skilled, qualified folk. Sure, they occasionally have the odd bad day – but on balance the chances of a failure at a critical point are (touch wood) remote. Drone OEI performance over densely populated areas, engine overhaul parameters, reliability checks? Can a one or two kilo drone, with a payload and OEI (even one with four rotors) be managed and completely controlled at maximum payload? Guaranteed to maintain height and controllability? Can you imagine the media drama if a failed 2 Kg drone fell from a couple of hundred feet,  collided with a stroller and hurt a child – or broke a windscreen – or; caught fire and smacked into a building causing a fire. There would be all the seven Hells to pay, by Tuesday.

This, before we even think about ‘separation’ and ‘right of way’ or collision avoidance. Imagine the drama – Woolworths milk delivery collides with Fred’s Pizza and the bits rain down on a busy area or a highway? Don’t bear thinking about do it. The narrow band of airspace available around the cities – given airports and hospitals and public land and major transport hubs which all would need a dedicated ‘no-fly zone’ the chances of a collision are greatly increased. This without even considering ‘parts’ of drones landing wherever and the chance of them hitting whoever. Aye; tis a problem which must be solved.

So much for ‘regulated’ licenced traffic over built up areas; but what of the non registered, non licenced hooligans? How is anyone to ‘police’ that crowd. They ain’t going to register; they ain’t going to sit exams; they ain’t going to ‘obey’ the statutory rules. Which, standing alone is bad enough; but who – exactly – is going to police them? How will the ‘law’ even set about catching ‘em? Mission impossible IMO. It must be of great concern to Police, Ambulance, Fire and rescue services, not to mention aircrews on final approach or take off; particular worry for the airborne crews. IF – gods forbid – we ever loose a rescue unit or an airliner to a collision with an illegal, untraceable drone, I can’t even begin to imagine the fall out.

Then, there are ‘other’ serious security issues to address; privacy matters to consider; third part insurance liability; operational safety around airports; noise complaints;etc.

The list is endless, solutions few. But, most concerning of all - can we rely on a CASA who can barely generate a cohesive rule on pilot training; or fuel requirements; or Angel Flights; or, barely tell the truth at Estimates about tall buildings in runway safe zones to provide the answers? For that question I don’t need to think about an answer. NO, absolutely not, is the simple, short version – 30 years and hundreds of millions to produce the worlds' worst set of aviation regulations – and you want the aviation world to provide submissions to them. Oh, do Duck off you pathetic tragedy of a miniscule – you have got to be kidding.

Toot – toot. And Purdy rules.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)