BVLOS Progress

[Chaosrider]

I found this article refreshing!

"In the U.S., the company participates in the FAA’s BEYOND program to accelerate a framework for flight beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS)."

Flytrex Gets FAA Approval for One Mile Drone Deliveries. 1 Mile - 10,000 Homes.

Drone delivery specialists Flytrex get FAA approval for drone deliveries in a one mile radius - allowing them to reach 10,000 homes.

dronelife.com

TCS

 

[vindibona1]

I have to wonder what the long term viability of drone deliveries might be. Right now we have folks living in close proximity to where we fly complaining about the noise or the perception of intrusiveness of our little baby drones. I can foresee local governments banning drone deliveries for a variety of reasons, noise abatement probably being at the top of the list. How much payload can one drone carry before it has to return to the mothership to reload cargo and fly back out again, one drone having many sorties daily? Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.

I can also foresee, in the future, a surge in campaign contributions. Just me and my Quija board chiming in.

 

[BSauce955]

Also, I assume these rules won't be applicable to normal flyers and just these delivery companies? I fail to see the cause of excitement for us normal flyers. VLOS laws will still be applicable to us as far as I can see. Maybe, I'm just small-minded...

 

[vindibona1]

Also, I assume these rules won't be applicable to normal flyers and just these delivery companies? I fail to see the cause of excitement for us normal flyers. VLOS laws will still be applicable to us as far as I can see. Maybe, I'm just small-minded...

You're right. It won't apply to us, unless somehow they use the commercial flights to justify opening it up for us smaller UAV pilots. But I don't think that is a reality. What I think is drone deliveries sound good on paper, but I don't think they'll understand the unintended consequences of them until the program is fully operational and might be too late for the government regulators to ditch the program if the public finds it a nuisance. Think about how much noise 6" props on 4 motors makes, then scale it up to carry cargo. A 1mile BVLOS will only be good in denser urban environments. I can't imagine what that will do to the noise levels.

 

[Chaosrider]

I have to wonder what the long term viability of drone deliveries might be. Right now we have folks living in close proximity to where we fly complaining about the noise or the perception of intrusiveness of our little baby drones.

I don't think there's the slightest doubt that drone delivery is going to be viable in the long term. There's just too much money to be made with it.

Unless there's ACTUAL intrusion, people are going to need to get over their concern that there MIGHT be.

And delivery drones will get quieter over time.

I can foresee local governments banning drone deliveries for a variety of reasons, noise abatement probably being at the top of the list.

Unless the departure or landing point is within their jurisdiction, they don't have the power to do that. If it's just using the air, the FAA rules.

Also, I assume these rules won't be applicable to normal flyers and just these delivery companies?

Initially, yes.

Camel's Nose!



TCS

I fail to see the cause of excitement for us normal flyers. VLOS laws will still be applicable to us as far as I can see.

It's motion in the right direction. Once everyone sees it works, it will dispel some of the irrational fear (as opposed to the rational risk mitigation) around BVLOS.

BVLOS will require aircraft with special equipment, and specially trained pilots. Just like the Instrument Rating does. That's rational risk mitigation. Over time, the special equipment required, will get cheaper.

After looking into it more, RID is clearly going to support the expansion of BVLOS. I now fully support RID, with the single exception of the snitch function.

As long as someone has a drone with the special equipment, and has the right training, anyone will be able to fly BVLOS.

Eventually.



TCS

 

[sar104]

After looking into it more, RID is clearly going to support the expansion of BVLOS. I now fully support RID, with the single exception of the snitch function.

So remote ID, without the remote ID?

 

[Ralph thompson]

We recently had a progress report from Transport Canada (the Canadian regulator). There's no doubt it is progressing although several large organizations like Amazon have reduced funding and had layoffs. BVLOS is already being used in the maintenance (gas pipe lines and power lines) and agriculture with special permission (SFOC's required) and for emergency assistance in remote areas. But we're a long way from having parcels delivered to our doorsteps and its not going to be with consumer drones.

 

[BSauce955]

...BVLOS will require aircraft with special equipment, and specially trained pilots. Just like the Instrument Rating does. That's rational risk mitigation. Over time, the special equipment required, will get cheaper...

From what I heard, delivery drones will be controlled by AI and not by a human operator...

 

[Chaosrider]

So remote ID, without the remote ID?

Sorry, I thought the meaning would be clear from the context of earlier discussions on this.

1) Full remote ID to FAA and LEOs -- all good
2) Registration number to J Random Citizen -- all good
3) Base station/RC location to JRC --all bad

TCS

 

[Chaosrider]

We recently had a progress report from Transport Canada (the Canadian regulator). There's no doubt it is progressing although several large organizations like Amazon have reduced funding and had layoffs. BVLOS is already being used in the maintenance (gas pipe lines and power lines) and agriculture with special permission (SFOC's required) and for emergency assistance in remote areas. But we're a long way from having parcels delivered to our doorsteps and its not going to be with consumer drones.

Not for a while, perhaps...but we'll get there.



TCS

 

[Chaosrider]

From what I heard, delivery drones will be controlled by AI and not by a human operator...

In dense packed urban areas, that may be the best solution.

But if a human pilot can demonstrate the necessary skills and has a properly equipped drone, they'll be allowed to do it.

The sort of SiFi twist would be, if the performance specs are so tight, that humans can't do it.

In that event, Skynet will be that much closer to reality...

;-)

TCS

 

[BSauce955]

In dense packed urban areas, that may be the best solution.

But if a human pilot can demonstrate the necessary skills and has a properly equipped drone, they'll be allowed to do it.

The sort of SiFi twist would be, if the performance specs are so tight, that humans can't do it.

In that event, Skynet will be that much closer to reality...

;-)

TCS

I fail to see why large delivery companies (Amazon for example) would hire many drone operators that they'll have to pay to manage drones that they could have an AI fly for free. Also, (supposedly) AI's can fly (and fight, not that it's relevant) better and more efficiently than any normal pilot. Unless a drone pilot is willing to fly for free, or AI's are somehow proved to be unworthy of the job, then I doubt that drone pilots will be getting salaries to fly delivery drones. If something is off in my reasoning, please point it out.

 

[sar104]

Sorry, I thought the meaning would be clear from the context of earlier discussions on this.

1) Full remote ID to FAA and LEOs -- all good
2) Registration number to J Random Citizen -- all good
3) Base station/RC location to JRC --all bad

TCS

LE may need the RC location, but I agree that it doesn't need to be publicly available.

 

[hiflyer201]

Imagine that...five-minute delivery from a position a whole mile away. For some reason that doesn't sound all the practical except maybe in LA on the Sepulveda pass during ....well most any time of day.

 

[Bebopperoo]

Please can someone help me understand why ANY value is attached to vlos? A stupid, useless rule! I struggled to see my drones at 100m, and even when i could, would frequently lose sight of it when i glanced down at my phone. I am a trained light aircraft pilot, and know techniques such as scanning, but still couldnt figure out accurately where the drone was in relation to the ground, especially when it was high.
Then i got the goggles, and orientation became simple, regardless of distance. I could look straight down to see precisely what i was above. I never got disoriented, as north, the home point, plus the orientation of the drone and all relevant telemetry are always right there on screen. All info is available without looking away, and i don't get blinded by the sun or confused by the drone blending in with the background.
Fpv makes orientation and awareness very very easy, regardless of distance. Vlos is useless past 50m, unless you have very good eyes.
So why vlos instead of fpv?? Especially regarding safety?

 

[sar104]

Please can someone help me understand why ANY value is attached to vlos? A stupid, useless rule! I struggled to see my drones at 100m, and even when i could, would frequently lose sight of it when i glanced down at my phone. I am a trained light aircraft pilot, and know techniques such as scanning, but still couldnt figure out accurately where the drone was in relation to the ground, especially when it was high.
Then i got the goggles, and orientation became simple, regardless of distance. I could look straight down to see precisely what i was above. I never got disoriented, as north, the home point, plus the orientation of the drone and all relevant telemetry are always right there on screen. All info is available without looking away, and i don't get blinded by the sun or confused by the drone blending in with the background.
Fpv makes orientation and awareness very very easy, regardless of distance. Vlos is useless past 50m, unless you have very good eyes.
So why vlos instead of fpv?? Especially regarding safety?

Firstly, for situational awareness of the airspace around you, of course. Orienting your aircraft relative to the ground is not the primary concern. When you are flying a plane, why are you scanning? To see and avoid other traffic. Your limited FPV 70° field of view doesn't work for that at all, so you need to keep the aircraft close enough that you can see and avoid other traffic from your control point.

Secondly, loss of video/telemetry is pretty common, so you need to be able to orient your UAV and fly it back without the help of either of those. Again - that requires VLOS.

I'm really surprised that these issues would not be completely obviously to a "trained pilot". And by the way - if you can't see your drone beyond 50 m then you probably shouldn't be flying anything, manned or unmanned.

 

[Defens]

From what I heard, delivery drones will be controlled by AI and not by a human operator...

You mean like these? (Hunter/Killer drone from Terminator) -

 

[EricJT]

I don't think there's the slightest doubt that drone delivery is going to be viable in the long term. There's just too much money to be made with it.

Unless there's ACTUAL intrusion, people are going to need to get over their concern that there MIGHT be.

And delivery drones will get quieter over time.

So should we anticipate sky pirates like today's porch pirates? Uh

 

[R.Cowan]

Sorry, I thought the meaning would be clear from the context of earlier discussions on this.

1) Full remote ID to FAA and LEOs -- all good
2) Registration number to J Random Citizen -- all good
3) Base station/RC location to JRC --all bad

TCS

 

[R.Cowan]

There is zero reason for JRC to have access to RPIC!