SDIS and ARCHER opinion

[Pumbaa]

I am doing a little trade study on systems used for photography during SAR, CD etc...

I want REAL opinions on ARCHER and SDIS.  Tell me why it works and why it does not work.  What are the strengths and weaknesses.

Also, what would YOU look for in a digital imaging systems.

[Eclipse]

Ease of use and accessibility.

ARCHER meets neither of these.

SDIS is fine, but unnecessary in most cases.  Few missions we fly need real-time imaging.

The majority require clear, appropriate images, which can be presented to a customer on CD or sent via email at an FBO in the mission area.

[sparks]

The SDIS concept is good but the execution isn't. If time is short and customers anxious a direct feed from the aircraft is fantastic. It allows the receiving customer to redirect aircraft if the images aren't what they wanted. The problem is with the inaccessible satellite (busy signals etc.)and difficult usability of the computer tablet in turbulence.

Archer requires very expensive aircraft and crew training that frequently isn't funded. With few exceptions it hasn't lived up to the advertised capability.

[Mustang]

Both need to be scrapped and re-thought.   Hyperspectral imaging has not proven anywhere near as useful for any of its proposed missions.  SDIS is too dependent on operator skill and a crappy satellite vendor.

What customers want and expect is live video, just like a Predator UAV delivers. 

If CAP has any hope of keeping such missions alive, we need to acquire something capable of real-time imagery delivery.  The necessary technology is widely available, virtually every news helicopter in the country has a pod-mounted camera, and in my travels around the country, I've seen such pods adapted for use on Cessnas.



Shoot, here's the exact system, employed for the exact purpose we need:

http://mae.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?Section=Articles&Subsection=Display&ARTICLE_ID=222001

[Pumbaa]

Looking at the costs do you think that would effect the effective distribution?  how many ARCHERS are out there?  Would an inexpensive system that can be placed on all CAP planes be more effective or even a portable system?

[Eclipse]

The reality is that with off the shelf parts and an FCC waiver for cel phone use we could build a robust system for near-time and real-time imaging for close to nothing.

I have the needed gear in my bag right now.

[Pumbaa]

Agree'd.  I already have the parts as well to use as a COTS system.  it is so easy!

[Hoser]

If you only knew what was discussed in the ARCHER Summit in March 08. I think that would squelch all you so-called ARCHER experts  ooops I mean naysyers

[RiverAux]

Well, whose fault is it for not dispersing that information out to all us uninformed folks?  You have to sell programs to your members, not just outside folks. 

[jimmydeanno]

...and remember kids, knowledge is power!

[Pumbaa]

"If you only knew what was discussed..."

If a tool is not in its proper place it does not exist.   Why would you have a 'summit' yet not let others know what the 'capabilities' truly are?

[isuhawkeye]

there is a third option.  When I was active in CAP Iowa had a very active "Slow scan"video system.  This system allowed for reel time imagery with out the internet infrastructure. 

[RiverAux]

The slowscan concept is still feasible, but the quality was not great the last time I used it (maybe 7 years ago) and wouldn't be at all acceptable today.  However, I don't know if that was due to the video camera we were using (not top of the line then) or how much information could be transmitted over the radio.  As I recall it took about 2 minutes to transmit the junky photos and it would probably be 2-3 times that to transmit a photo of acceptable quality today.  The other issue was that you would often have to rise to 5-6 thousand feet to transmit, taking additional time.  At that point it becomes almost quicker to just go back to base and download the photos. 

[Eclipse]

You'd have better luck transmitting photos via packet radio, which would also use existing equipment.

However why anyone would pursue sending low-res photos over a radio just to get poor near-time photos when you can wait ten minutes, land and get 12megapixel full-res images from the internet would be beyond me.

[Pumbaa]

Eclipse you are correct.  That's why broadband WiFi would be the best option for something on the cheap and using COTS items.

[IceNine]

It is also easily interceptable, with a TNC, radio, an old TV you've got the picture.

Interception is not necessarily a favorable trait to a lot of out customers, especially for things like downed A/C's and the like.

[Pumbaa]

True... So now you have to add some form of encryption.  My thought is using FTP to transmit images so add in a step to automatically ZIP and encrypt say like 256 AES, and then also use a secure FTPS.

[Eclipse]

He's referring to the slow scan, not broadband.

There are ways to intercept those, too, but it requires more than the average "scanner-guy" can do
quickly enough to be useful.

But nothing wrong with encryption and its plenty easy to implement.

[Hoser]

All ARCHER operators have signed a non disclosure agreement, which includes  non ARCHER CAP members, although not specifically addressed in the agreement it is an understood thing. I will err on the side of keeping out of hot water with the powers that be. Opsec remember? Or does that not apply when ARCHER is involved???

[RiverAux]

Thats fine, but then don't complain when the rest of us evaluate the program based on what we have seen ourselves or read about the program.  You're not going to change anybody's mind by going all secret squirrel and claiming there is a big old nut buried somewhere out in the forest, but that you're not allowed to tell us about how good it tastes.