MQ-9 Reaper (Formerly RQ-9 Predator) Cleared by FAA for SAR

[wingnut55]

So little did we know  http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?storyID=123024467

On 18 May 2006, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) issued a certificate of authorization that allows the MQ-1 and MQ-9 aircraft to fly in U.S. civilian airspace to search for survivors of disasters. Requests had been made in 2005 for the aircraft to be used in search and rescue operations following Hurricane Katrina, but because there was no FAA authorization in place at the time, the assets were not used.

Additionally, the MQ-1 also has an infrared camera with a digitally enhanced zoom capable of identifying a heat source as small as a person from 10,000 feet, the colonel said.

[wingnut55]

11.06.06

NASA Supports UAS Fire Mapping Efforts on California Fire

The California Governor's Office of Emergency Services and the Esperanza Fire Incident Command Center requested NASA's imaging and fire mapping assistance. The Altair Unmanned Aircraft System, built and operated by General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc., San Diego, Calif., was prepared to fly in less than 24 hours. The flight was facilitated by the Federal Aviation Administration, which assures the safety of unmanned aircraft system flights in the National Airspace System. Recent changes to the FAA's organizational structure allowed the approval to be expedited, while ensuring no degradation of safety and without imposing any new temporary flight restrictions.
From an altitude of 43,000 feet, the wildfire sensor collected and sent 100 images and more than 20 data files containing the location of the fire perimeter over a 16-hour period on Oct. 28 and 29. The data were delivered in real time through a satellite communications link. NASA and Forest Service specialists worked to familiarize the fire management team with accessing capabilities and sensor data format. The data from the NASA system were used by the Esperanza Fire Incident Command Center to map fire behavior and direct resources to critical areas on the fire.

[wingnut55]

Border Patrol Operations

The United States Department of Homeland Security initially ordered one Predator B for border patrol duty, referred to as MQ-9 CBP-101. It began operations 4 October 2005, but on 25 April 2006, this aircraft crashed in the Arizona desert. The NTSB determined (Record Identification: CHI06MA121[14]) that the cause of the crash was most likely a pilot error by the aircraft's ground-based pilot in the use of a checklist. During its operational period, the aircraft flew 959 hours on patrol and had a part in 2,309 arrests. It also contributed to the seizure of four vehicles and 8,267 pounds of marijuana.[15] Because of these successes, a second Predator B, called "CBP-104" (initially referred to as "CBP-102"), was delivered in September 2006, and commenced limited border protection operations on 18 October 2006.

The President's FY 2006 Emergency Supplemental budget request added $45 million for the Predator B program, and the FY 2007 Homeland Security Appropriations bill adds an additional $20 million. In October 2006, GA-ASI announced a $33.9 million contract to supply two more Predator B systems by Fall 2007. The Department intends to eventually have four aircraft operational.

The CBP-101 was equipped with the Lynx SAR, AX-15 payload, ARC-210 radios, and other sensors and communications equipment; CBP-104 was enhanced with Ku band satellite command and control link and MTS-A EO/IR sensors.

[Pumbaa]

So what are you trying to say Wingnut?

[CadetProgramGuy]

So what are you trying to say Wingnut?

Lets hope that Flight Sim gets a UAV?

[Tubacap]

Isn't it a UAV by definition?  Unless you crawl into your computer I guess...

[hatentx]

So how long until we start playing with them or need to find a new way to be marketable?

[lordmonar]

Don't worry....it will be a long time before CAP will get any UAV capability.

They WILL get the capability.....but it will be 10-15 years or so.

[Flying Pig]

I can guarantee we''ll never use them.  The full training time is close to 2 years for the sensor operator, between school and the required On the Job Training.  Thats not even being the pilot.  The CA Air National Guard Unit at March ARB in CA, although Guardsman, are not by any stretch.  They work 4 day drills, and according to a member of the unit I talked to, when I was looking at enlisting for a sensor operator said they are pretty much all full time and one of the instructors said it would be near impossible to come in 3 days per month and actually expect to be proficient by any means.  These arent going to be something we take a form 5 on, and a few online course to get signed off. 
Where in the world do we think CAP will have the budget, infrastructure and staffing to man UAV's, and why would the government give them to us, pay for the equipment and training and facilities when they could just add more of their own?  Im curious, are we going to have CAP members doing weekends at Air Force bases manning UAV's while our military counterparts stand back and watch or will each Wing be provided a command center and a UAV that comes in a trailer?  Im really not being sarcastic.
So if you want to use one, contact the 163rd Reconnaissance Wing, CA Air Guard, and we'll see you in 2 years.  1-800-864-6264, they're looking for people.  You could be our mole!

[heliodoc]

CAP and UAV technology???

Where is CAP, Inc a no"non profit" non government agency going to get the dinero to run the program??

If CAP chirps about NIMS compliance, Specialty Tracks that haven't been updated for many in 15 yrs+, ETC how in God's name are they EVER going to keep up with UAV tech.

Where's that Kool Aid you are drinking....... I want some!!

Who in CAP is going to Congress and the AF on this one??   

[lordmonar]

I can guarantee we''ll never use them.  The full training time is close to 2 years for the sensor operator, between school and the required On the Job Training.

BS.

Sorry to be so short...but I work with MQ-1s on a daily basis and it does not take that long.....also you are looking at a fully qualified combat sensor operator.....if CAP were ever to get a UAV platform 90% of the mission qualfication tasks would not apply to SAR/DR/CD operations.

Where in the world do we think CAP will have the budget, infrastructure and staffing to man UAV's, and why would the government give them to us, pay for the equipment and training and facilities when they could just add more of their own?  Im curious, are we going to have CAP members doing weekends at Air Force bases manning UAV's while our military counterparts stand back and watch or will each Wing be provided a command center and a UAV that comes in a trailer?  Im really not being sarcastic.

One possible scenerio is that CAP would only be qualified and staff the Launch and Recover Units.  These would be stationed around the USA to allow good coverage.  In the event of a SAR the LRE would launch and the the CAP operations center would take over from there.

So if you want to use one, contact the 163rd Reconnaissance Wing, CA Air Guard, and we'll see you in 2 years.  1-800-864-6264, they're looking for people.  You could be our mole!

Or you can talk to me....I have been doing it for 2 years. 

[wingnut55]

What am I trying to Say??

Well I guess that I am saying if National does not get with it and upgrade the Archer with the Technology the customers are asking for we are going to be replaced by a guy flying a UAV from a truck.

I was just not aware of the FAAs clearing the UAVs for SAR, this is just another example of NHQ being too slow to get on the band wagon.

[Pumbaa]

That's what I thought you were trying to say Wingnut...

[Eclipse]

Well I guess that I am saying if National does not get with it and upgrade the Archer with the Technology the customers are asking for we are going to be replaced by a guy flying a UAV from a truck.

No, we're not, at least not in the next decade or so.

[DNall]

What am I trying to Say??

Well I guess that I am saying if National does not get with it and upgrade the Archer with the Technology the customers are asking for we are going to be replaced by a guy flying a UAV from a truck.

No, we're not, at least not in the next decade or so.

Obviously we aren't going out of business in the next couple years based on this, everyone agrees on that. So, moving on.

If this is something that'll zap a lot of our current mission set in 5-8-10 years, then we need to be changing now to prevent that from happening.

As I've said before, I believe that's by making our efficient manned Cessna platforms into poor-man's predators.

Specifically, by taking the SDIS concept that's great in theory & crap in practice, and injecting some steroids. I believe that's the addition of inexpensive off-the-shelf 5-10 year old FLIR systems run over a lap top & sent out real time over a sat link.

That gives you real time FLIR on the customer's desk to do exactly the kinds of missions being cited above. The fire one in particular is something we'd do a lot of here - can you imagine a crew foreman on the ground with a PDA or fire air branch director calling water drops on hot spots? That's a lot better that flying around looking for smoke. It's got great SAR/DR/CD implications that really improve our capability.

I can't speak to ARCHER, I'm not that knowledgeable about it. I know it's not up to par right now. At least it's not highly useful for SaR, but I've heard the justification it's great for CD, then heard from experienced operators that it's worthless in that role. I don't know. If it can be modified to meet all they hype it's had in the past, then by all means we should do that too.

Whatever the answer, we need to take this development as motivation to push our capabilities into the CAP of the future.

[afgeo4]

1. There aren't enough UAVs to do all this work.

2. UAVs won't be stationed ALL over the CONUS. Just a handful of bases. Their range prevents easy/fast deployment unless a major emergency happens like Katrina.

3. UAVs will support CAP in SAR work. They will deconflict airspace because they can perform at 10,000 feet instead of 1000 feet where most CAP aircraft and helicopters perform. They can fly in poor visibility and at night (that will be their primary operations slot/capability). CAP will be used more in daylight and good weather conditions (CAP is still cheaper and that's what we do now anyway). Look at UAV's as additional capability in SAR, not as a replacement for Cessnas, Gippslands, and Sikorskis/Bells.

4. CAP probably will get UAVs, but they won't be MQ-1 or MQ-9. Those aren't the only birds flying today and certainly not the only ones that will fly tomorrow. Many unmanned vehicles will be so automated that they'll only need a somewhat trained eye to identify a target as what is being looked for and that's all.

5. As UAV technology gets more advanced, it also gets cheaper. CAP will be able to afford simple machines in the future.

6. Have your cadet units practice flying radio controlled aircraft outdoors. Then see if you can work them into flight sims. That's almost exactly like flying a UAV you know.

[DNall]

1. There aren't enough UAVs to do all this work.

2. UAVs won't be stationed ALL over the CONUS. Just a handful of bases. Their range prevents easy/fast deployment unless a major emergency happens like Katrina.

That's changing as many new recon wings are being stood up in the ANG. My joint reserve base lost F16s & the wing is re-designated to pick up Predators. They hadn't showed up yet, cause the FAA thing is not as settled as the above stories indicate, but it'll happen.

And, the UAVs that are useful as a stable photo platform with the payload for the kinds of optics they'd need, even from our altitudes, would have to be the scale of a Cessna anyway. Sure, those optics will get smaller & lighter, but that's not cheap. It'll be a long while before CAP is using anything like that.

Yes, UAVs in this role will fly high & supplement CAP search. However, that's cutting down the number of hours CAP flies on that mission. Remember, you're flying till you locate, or till you meet POD goals on a set of primary & secondary grids. The more you use a UAV, the less CAP flies.

On the other hand, I'd sure like to see CAP with the kind of capabilities I described above, selling to AF/Congress that we're covering down on this domestic mission with this competitive technology so AF can preserve thier capability for the warfighter role.

[DNall]

this is awsomly on topic:

http://chairforce.com/videos/2008/pages/baby-pilots.htm

[hatentx]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Freaking awesome