This is my report on a research article that covers the future of unmanned system applications
This article, Drone methodologies: Taking flight in human and physical geography, fully supported the use of unmanned aerial
systems (UAS) in the fields of physical and human geography. The three aims of
this paper were to “start a discussion” between different geographical fields to
foster the spread of UAS methodologies, to discuss how UAS “expand the
potential for thinking about ‘visual’”
geographic uses, and to also do the same for “volumetric” methods. The authors
also proposed the creation of drone airspace where drones can operate above obstacles
but safely stay below air traffic. This airspace was coined the “Neophosphere”
which was derived from the Greek word for cloud (nepho) and sphere (which is
also a Greek word). This airspace
carries the characteristic of also being the volume of air from which a drone
can operate within contact with its human manned control center. For example, a
line-of-sight drone would have a small localized Neophosphere compared to the Global
Hawk military drone which has a global-reaching Neophosphere (Garrett &
Anderson, 2018). In addition to these goals, the article explored and discussed
not only the impact that UAS could have on geographic methods, but also the possible
political and societal implications of UAS.
Defining
and creating a Neophosphere is something I agreed with the authors about. The
FAA in the United States had worked hard in recent years to create regulations
to facilitate drones into the national airspace (Federal Aviation Administration,
2019). These regulations however lacked the completeness of the Neophosphere
proposed by the authors. Using already defined airspace was an advantage of the
Neophosphere proposal. It would include the FAA defined airspace that is closest
to the ground and below most general and commercial aviation traffic (Garrett
& Anderson, 2018). In aviation language, the Neophosphere would encompass
class G airspace where crop-dusters, helicopters, and low-flying aircraft, well-accustomed
to the dangers of low-flying bird and drones, operate. I agree with this
argument for a defined airspace for drones because the current FAA rules were
few and limited in scope. The rules only stated that a drone must be registered,
stay below 400 feet, and not fly into airport-controlled airspace (Federal
Aviation Administration, 2019). I also think
that a bit of education about FAA airspace would educate drone pilots better
about the general aviation aircraft their drones might encounter.
A point
that this article made was that geographers use UAS in small volumes of the Neophosphere
when there is much more airspace to use to enhance UAS operations. An example
was of recent digital mapping project of the “Christ the Redeemer” statue in
Brazil. Researchers started the project using satellite images (like
traditional geographers) and found that these images lacked the detail to
accurately render the statue. Local, on-sight images of the statue were also
used to provide more fidelity but they couldn’t capture details on the top of
the statue. UAS fitted with cameras flew around the statue and finally provided
the full image overage and fidelity needed to create the desired rendering (Garrett
& Anderson, 2018). This example was a very strong argument for the unique
capabilities that drones provide provided that operators take full advantage of
available airspace.
The case
most brought up was the fact that many people associate drones with an oppressive
narrative of being the ever-watching eyes of an oppressive “Big Brother”
observer. Whether it was a drone operated by law enforcement to monitor crime or
a hobbyist enjoying some sight-seeing, people associate drones with the fear of
being constantly monitored. A defense for operators was to create and know the
policies and laws that govern drone use. The author recalled the story of using
a drone to film a skyscraper under construction while on a trip. A security
guard from the building demanded that the author stop filming the building because
the building is privately owned. The author calmly explained that he was filming
from a public park in uncongested airspace implying that he was legally allowed
to film the building. The frustrated security guard snapped back with the claim
that air around the building was also privately owned! (Garrett & Anderson,
2018).
Lastly, the
authors argued that UAS could be used in new, creative, and innovative ways to
gather data. Many geographic methods involving UAS were limited to just using
aerial imaging operated by a line-of-sight pilot. The article argued that drone
technology had advanced to the point that other sensors and other control
methods could be used to conduct geographical surveys. One example was to use
autonomous drones more to survey wide swaths of land. I agreed that this
technology is useful because other industries like the pipeline monitoring
industry used and are considering autonomous drones for surveillance (Kochetkova,
2019).
Overall, I
agree with the points this article made about UAS applications in geographical studies.
UAS can provide an enormous advantage but they still have several political and
societal challenges to overcome.
-Marty
Garrett B., & Anderson K. (2018). Drone methodologies:
Taking flight in human and physical geography. Transactions of the Institute
of British Geographers, 43, 341–359. Doi:
10.1111/tran.12232
Kochetkova, L. I. (2018). Pipeline monitoring with
unmanned aerial vehicles. Journal of Physics, 1015.
doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1015/4/042021
Recreational Flyers & Modeler Community-Based
Organizations. (2019). Federal Aviation Administration. Retrieved from https://www.faa.gov/uas/recreational_fliers/
No comments:
Post a Comment