A Journey into Unmanned Systems

Collision Avoidance Via Sense and Avoidance The legislative requirements established by The Federal Aviation Administrations’ policy on UAS collision avoidance cover both operator/pilot and technological requirements. The operator/pilot must operate the UAS safely as stated in the Civil Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration Roadmap into the National Airspace System and formally in Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations section C.2. Furthermore the Federal Aviation Administration states the actions for operator/pilot must display safe operation practice and knowledge in order to prevent a collision, and meet minimum qualifications as stated by the FAA or the Department of Defense. The summary is stated by the FAA as follows: At the core of these policies is the concept that each aircraft is flown by a pilot in accordance with required procedures and practices. This same policy applies to UAS. Regulatory standards need to be developed to enable current technology for unmann

  UAS Strengths and Weaknesses The UAS mission I am comparing between military and civilian platforms are that of Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR). The military platform could employ the use of a RQ-20B Puma by AeroVironment. The Puma according to AeroVironment is comprised of the following features: “360 degree gimbal, EO, IR, camera, IR Illuminator, 20km range, 3.5+ endurance hours, 500ft AGL, hand and rail launching, autonomous or deep stall landing” (AeroVironment, 2017). The police platform would be comprised of the Vanguard ShadowHawk. The ShadowHawk contains the following options within its platform: “full autonomous operation, electro-optical camera, Infra-red capability, nighttime sensors, 15km range, 3hour endurance (depending on payload), and a transportable GCS with complimentary travel case” (Vanguard, 2017). The strengths and weaknesses between both platforms are derived from the endurance offered and by power regeneration. The Puma provides l