PLEASE sign the petition to use Drones for SAR, it may save your life!

[socaldmax]

Originally Posted by onefastdaddy

Thank you for posting about the petition.

I have been following these things for a while now. Since 2005. I've assembled quite a few myself and helped many more make their own by supplying the components (i.e. assembling the circuit boards and making cables and parts for other peoples projects).

I really feel it is a great project for the family. The prices in the last few years have really dropped and depending on your level of effort it can be incredibly inexpensive.

This whole industry is about at the stage Personal computers were in the 70s.

I wish we could just all put them in perspective but I guess the media has their orders. The reality is what most people think is autonomous is really remotely piloted. Remotely piloted is far more dangerous to me. Autonomous only goes where it is told and you can restrict it to say 400' and set an electronic leash on it so if it strays it will either land or fly home. Remotely piloted can go anywhere the pilot desires...even up into the clouds and into the way of manned aircraft. This is truly a danger and something none of these laws are even targeting.

Truly incredible the level of misinformation and misunderstanding out there.

I agree with all you posted, but if they're used in a coordinated search with manned aircraft and each is assigned a specific altitude - say 10,000 ft for C-130s and 25,000ft for the UAVs, they're separated by 15,000 ft vertically, should be plenty to prevent them from colliding. Their advanced optics and FLIR allows them to cover more area at higher altitudes than a person with binoculars.

They can also carry quite a bit of payload, perhaps a torpedo shaped liferaft with drysuits and water to help them survive until rescuers can arrive.

[socaldmax]

Originally Posted by Adodero

There was an article in PS a few months back that documented exactly what you are talking about. The USCG was testing a series of drones for use of SAR operations, mainly the S part

For long distance offshore search operations, I can see adoption occurring rather quickly. Once you move further in shore, you encounter a number of other issues (FAA, privacy, etc), hurdles that will slow adoption closer to shore.

That's great news the USCG is looking into it! According to Wikipedia, the Air Force is looking to retire the MQ-1 and donate the last of them to other branches, perhaps the USCG will get them.

[Stu Jackson]

Your helpful and considerate remarks certainly assures more support.

Originally Posted by socaldmax

Do whatever you please.

Quibbling over "rescue" isn't really worth it. I understand that you think it's of paramount importance that you prove you're right, but that couldn't be further from my mind.

I specifically stated that the drones would assist, alongside Coast Guard and Navy assets, but I guess you didn't notice that.

Having to explain the obvious to you simply indicates that you're not nearly as intelligent as you'd like to think you are. It's a great idea. Only a petty person would be offended and not support a great idea.

Or better yet, get off your ass and start a petition with a better idea. I'll gladly sign it. Regardless of how irritating you are, I simply want the gov't to use better resources to help search for people at sea, which in turn helps with the rescue (obviously.)

[onefastdaddy]

Originally Posted by socaldmax

I agree with all you posted, but if they're used in a coordinated search with manned aircraft and each is assigned a specific altitude - say 10,000 ft for C-130s and 25,000ft for the UAVs, they're separated by 15,000 ft vertically, should be plenty to prevent them from colliding. Their advanced optics and FLIR allows them to cover more area at higher altitudes than a person with binoculars.

They can also carry quite a bit of payload, perhaps a torpedo shaped liferaft with drysuits and water to help them survive until rescuers can arrive.

Yep.

In my mind the drones would skim the surface tho...On board optic flow can almost immediately "see" what is deemed interesting below. Also fly in conditions humans should not fly in.

There was a lot of searching for a not so small airliner recently. Every bit helps.

Little autonomous things like I'm talking about (tiny little ones) do not fly all that far or fast. But you can swarm hundreds of them at once. Want to find a lost child? Send 100 of them out to search a small area fast. Land, recharge, fly again (automated recharge, take off and land). Almost 7/24 overhead surveillance of a targeted area.

Little drones are the worker bees not the solution or the heavy equipment. Example: What if someone needed medicine right now but it was too foggy to land a copter (land or sea). You could send a full scale plane/copter to drop a drone that in any conditions could fly the last mile down to the deck.

Tools simply make a difficult job easier or possible. That's my vision with these. Lots of times lives can be saved with things that are very small. Maybe dropping a water bottle, medicine, sat phone, radio or ?

The key here is if you wait for the FAA and Govt to develop these you're going to wait a very long time. If you let the good people like Gene who flies the SAR missions and who is saving lives fly and share knowledge with others you are going to see these happen now. Where do you think sat phones, computers and many more very useful technologies came from? Meaning if the govt banned or forbid anyone from having sat phones or computers etc...

[sailorboy1]

sometimes you just have to read ignored posts

I wouldn't really be surprised that dromes aren't already part of a search mission and they just don't advertise it. It really makes the tin foil hat people go nuts.

[MarkJ]

Originally Posted by Stu Jackson

WADR, SAR has THREE words in it.

How does a drone do the R part?

Easy! They cary a teeny-weeny life raft which they drop and it inflates with a cute lil soda water syphon cylinder, and out pop tiny little paddles, a tichy lil drogue and is fully supplied with ultra small cans of coke and minuscule meat lovers pizzas. YUM!




Mark

[Cavalier]

Originally Posted by MarkJ

.. with ultra small cans of coke...


Mark

..Surely, the coke would get all shaken up from the impact with the water and when you go to open them you'd fizz coke all over the inside of the raft!





Sent from my Windows Phone using Tapatalk

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by MarkJ

Easy! They cary a teeny-weeny life raft which they drop and it inflates with a cute lil soda water syphon cylinder, and out pop tiny little paddles, a tichy lil drogue and is fully supplied with ultra small cans of coke and minuscule meat lovers pizzas. YUM!




Mark

no beer?

[socaldmax]

In all seriousness guys, they have a 3,000 lb payload.


That could be a life raft, a few drysuits and a decent amount of water and food, as well as a radio, beacon, etc.

[socaldmax]

Originally Posted by onefastdaddy

Yep.

In my mind the drones would skim the surface tho...On board optic flow can almost immediately "see" what is deemed interesting below. Also fly in conditions humans should not fly in.

There was a lot of searching for a not so small airliner recently. Every bit helps.

Little autonomous things like I'm talking about (tiny little ones) do not fly all that far or fast. But you can swarm hundreds of them at once. Want to find a lost child? Send 100 of them out to search a small area fast. Land, recharge, fly again (automated recharge, take off and land). Almost 7/24 overhead surveillance of a targeted area.

Little drones are the worker bees not the solution or the heavy equipment. Example: What if someone needed medicine right now but it was too foggy to land a copter (land or sea). You could send a full scale plane/copter to drop a drone that in any conditions could fly the last mile down to the deck.

Tools simply make a difficult job easier or possible. That's my vision with these. Lots of times lives can be saved with things that are very small. Maybe dropping a water bottle, medicine, sat phone, radio or ?

The key here is if you wait for the FAA and Govt to develop these you're going to wait a very long time. If you let the good people like Gene who flies the SAR missions and who is saving lives fly and share knowledge with others you are going to see these happen now. Where do you think sat phones, computers and many more very useful technologies came from? Meaning if the govt banned or forbid anyone from having sat phones or computers etc...

I envisioned them flying higher because of their superior optics, they can cover a lot of area at higher altitudes.

[MarkSF]

Could someone please explain to me how a UAV is FASTER than a C130? (Predator drone, cruising speed = 100 kts. C130, cruising speed = 336 kts)

This must be a new definition of the word faster, one I wasn't previously familiar with.

[Cavalier]

Originally Posted by MarkSF

Could someone please explain to me how a UAV is FASTER than a C130? (Predator drone, cruising speed = 100 kts. C130, cruising speed = 336 kts)

This must be a new definition of the word faster, one I wasn't previously familiar with.

MQ9 Reaper cruises at ~160kts

C130 cruises at ~230kts








Sent from my Windows Phone using Tapatalk

[letsgetsailing3]

Originally Posted by MarkSF

Could someone please explain to me how a UAV is FASTER than a C130? (Predator drone, cruising speed = 100 kts. C130, cruising speed = 336 kts)

This must be a new definition of the word faster, one I wasn't previously familiar with.

Less crew prep time, for one. They can't send out a C130 until they've assembled the rescuers, whereas they can send a UAV as soon as they make the decision.

You can STILL send out the C130, if that's the right decision, but you can pre-equip a drone for some types of support, and it would normally arrive before a C130 would even take off.

[darylat8750]

"
IMO, this is a nonsensical debate. I do understand that drones present a danger in restricted air spaces but they I find it difficult to believe they are more dangerous than the millions upon millions of birds that fly at the same altitudes.

Drone Team That Finds Missing People and Dead Bodies Would Like To Keep Doing That - Forbes[/QUOTE]

WAY MORE DANGEROUS! I've flown through a flock of black birds that was so thick it sounded like someone was shooting us with a machine gun. Uneventful landing. Then after inspection did a maintenance ferry to have an engine changed. Went through a flock of sea gulls and killed at least seven of them with no damage to the airplane. Took an owl through the number 1 engine on a B727 on take off. The engine kept running and making power until we were at pattern altitude where we secured it and landed uneventfully. Several other bird strikes with no damage. The drones that have enough capability to be effective for off shore searches weigh many times as much as the biggest bird. And they have heavy metal parts, not just meat and bones. I wouldn't want to hit a goose with my windshield at a closing rate of 300+ mph. But, I would rather that then an engine (I don't know how much the drones engines weight that carry the high res. gear. Maybe 200 to 400 pounds?) at the same rate of closure.

[letsgetsailing3]

I think drones are a good idea in conjunction with other tools, but I also think that our military branches including the Coast Guard are already considering these, so I'm not understanding the goal of this petition.