Just endured two days of Teams calls hosted by NASA. I don't believe anyone in the room was at the NASA Ames UAS meeting in 2009 when I foretold the advent of the $1000 (eventual $350) Chinese UAV. In 2009 they tried to laugh me out of the room, suggesting the Chinese would never be able to produce anything as sophisticated as a drone. Well, here we are.
Esteemed reader, I must ask that no one take the following observations personally. For some reason, folks get sensitive. No one is insinuating or suggesting that anyone justify or defend poor regulation and policy promulgated by managers and other appointed individuals who were woefully unqualified. If you need examples, just Google who resigned from the FAA after the 737 MAX debacle, and Huerta. Improving Aviation Safety apparently doesn't always include Africans?
https://www.cast-safety.org/pdf/2020-AVS-002_Improving_Aviation_Safety_Report_sd25_web.pdf
The new shocker is the same old question: who is going to pay? We have mega-cap companies declaring their intention to complete millions of flights a day without a wit of care for profit, and they're still asking who is going to pay for the buildout.
Not much better out of the NASA UTM post-FAA UTM handoff follow-on work, as it is being written by the folks primarily peddling solutions to problems that have been identified several times before. Just read the names of the contributors/companies who wrote the document for the government employees and contractors.
The airspace integration situation is in worse shape than I thought. Folks continue to nakedly pitch their nonstarter "solutions" with engineering based on absurd assumptions.
The camel is in the tent next to the elephant, and everyone is sitting around almost oblivious that the United States and other Western countries have lost credibility and control of their respective airspace. It does not matter what you saw, what you think you saw, or if it was a UAO delusion. The notion that the World's only Superpower cannot tell you what is transpiring in its airspace is beyond the pale. A trillion dollars a year spent, and the DOW cannot defend itself from drones? We’ll let the FAA budget and effort sit for another time.
The assumptions, namely, the notion that Part 107 and consumer electronic quadcopter flyers obey the FAA regulations and policy, are, well, farcical. There are, of course, outliers amongst some of the certificated, and folks with a compunction to follow the law. Even suggesting more education is the answer after the absolute failure of the Buzzy the Drone (Donny the Drone in the UK) education-over-enforcement campaign is laughable. To silently collude with that supposition should be automatic grounds for removal from any serious airspace integration effort moving forward.
Sorry to be the one to break it to you. A Chinese toy company (on the customs paperwork) RID in no way constitutes a superpower airspace-sovereignty solution. The detection of 1600+ drones, with 700 seized at FIFA, indicates that the current FAA TFR, education initiatives, and NOTAM system are ineffectual.
The community has lost sight of the fact that FAA employees are public employees and, as such, supposedly work for the American people, safeguarding a public trust resource. Contrary to popular belief, it is not the FAA's airspace, and the old saying about the safety of the NAS is invalidated by some of the folks they give waivers to. I could employ a plethora of examples here, but why belabor the point.
In the past, "we need data," we need to take things slow" were plausible excuses to throw out. However, this is one instance where kicking the can down the road while whistling past the graveyard can no longer be employed. AAM NAS integration has evolved into both an economic and national security issue.
The possible solutions section. As always, please feel free to poach these ideas and tell people they are your own in the name of moving the ball forward.
After almost 25 years, the community and the public at large have every right to demand action from the FAA. I strongly believe political motivation is needed in the same vein as what I had suggested to the Obama White House. If the current crop of folks at the FAA are unwilling to do the work, find people who are.
From the FAA
- For the love of Pete, establish a baseline for DAA/SAA (Detect and Avoid/Sense and Avoid) as it is 20 years overdue.
- Start adopting the various standards, or cut everyone loose. Trim the carnival barkers, snake oil peddlers, and hucksters from the rosters. Maybe the FAA doesn't because they understand the standards groups are just moat factories?
- Point of Sale registration! Tell Best Buy, Walmart, and the toy companies to get stuffed.
- Public algorithm for space based ADS-B in
- Companies using US-made drones get concierge front-of-the-line waiver service for Part 107/108 operators—30 days maximum turnaround.
From the community -
- Tell the Government we want…
- Action! You have decades of data to use.
- Science based airspace integration and not feelings.
- A Drone Czar. Criteria was established, and nominations were made years ago, and a few Congresspeople tried to implement the idea.
Definition –
A Drone Czar is someone with professional/expert knowledge of not only the problems associated with UAS integration, but also the history, engineering, systems, and regulation required to put the Rube Goldberg machine together. This person has to have an intimate understanding of the laws and processes for UAS NAS integration and would be responsible for reporting to the highest levels of Government. International harmonization and working with the international groups would be a plus. They would also need to have the trust of the end-user community. Ulterior motives that would benefit, for example, a spouse's consulting firm or facilitate a former employer's moving product would not fly. Full integration, in any organized and timely fashion, means hiring someone who can integrate science, international business relations, and law with the pure interests of the business community.
@TheDroneDealer on X www.UASNEWSUS.com