Drones to Watch Over US Highways

[acmilano]

 

Drones could help human workers safeguard the 4 million miles of U.S. highways crisscrossing the country. The flying robots could inspect bridges and roads, survey lands with laser mapping, and even alert officials to traffic jams or accidents.

One such project focused on studying the use of drones recently received $74,984 from the Federal Highway Administration and the Georgia Department of Transportation. Researchers plan to spend the next year figuring out how drones could help workers as they go about inspecting and maintaining the safety of public roads and highways.

"Drones could keep workers safer because they won't be going into traffic or hanging off a bridge," said Javier Irizarry, director of the CONECTech Lab at the Georgia Institute of Technology. "It would help with physical limitations of the human when doing this kind of work."

Georgia represents one of several states considering how civilian drones could do some jobs for  transportation departments, the police and firefighters. The state is also competing to become one of several flight-test regions for the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration — a step in the FAA's plan to open up U.S. civilian airspace to drones by 2015.

Drones of all sizes and shapes could help safeguard state roads and bridges, Irizarry said. Small drones with cameras might take off vertically from the back of a truck to help inspect a bridge. [Video: RoboBees Design Poses Intriguing Engineering Challenges]

The larger, aircraft-size Reaper or Global Hawk drones could spend hours surveying traffic conditions or carry light detection and ranging (LIDAR) equipment that can map terrain with millions of laser pulses. That could potentially replace the expensive use of manned helicopters doing the same job.

Irizarry gave the example of the spherical drones that mapped a huge alien base in the 2012 science fiction film "Prometheus" as an analogy for how today's larger drones could aid in above-ground laser mapping. He has also enlisted the help of Eric Johnson, an aerospace engineer at Georgia Tech, to figure out the best role for drones.

"We're going to look at the different divisions that [DOT] has and see how they do things like surveying, safety monitoring or using traffic cameras," Irizarry told TechNewsDaily. "Maybe they could be using drone technology for a similar purpose."

But the human factor also matters. Georgia Tech researchers will spend the next year studying the best control schemes or interfaces for human workers to deploy drones — probably regular video displays rather than more futuristic augmented-reality goggles or technology, Irizarry said. They'll also consider how to retrain human workers if drones end up taking over some jobs.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/drones-watch-over-us...-155240670.html

 

Black Ops 2 anyone? Who would know that game is based on true events?

Edited January 31, 2013 by acmilano

[TheGodDamnMaster]

I don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but I will for the sake of my opinion. This country is turning into a nanny state, and quite frankly I'm sick of it.

[EgyptianStar]

 

I don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but I will for the sake of my opinion. This country is turning into a nanny state, and quite frankly I'm sick of it.

The correct term is "Police State". NYC is a nanny state can't even have a large soda without Bloomberg's permission.

[DarrinPA]

They could already be flying around, apparently they can't be seen at the height they fly at.

[SRB]

Big brother is watching.

[TheGodDamnMaster]

They could already be flying around, apparently they can't be seen at the height they fly at.

They've probably been around for years. They're probably just now telling us about new ones used for highways so they can ease us into the idea that having surveillance drones for neighborhood safety is also acceptable.

[AH64Hunter]

 

Drones could help human workers safeguard the 4 million miles of U.S. highways crisscrossing the country

 

Researchers plan to spend the next year figuring out how drones could help workers

[018361]

Aw just when the aliens stopped stalking me and I get to take off my aluminum-foiled hat for a second and then this happens. Now i'm just going to have to go double ply on my helmet. half tin and half aluminium.

 

On Topic: I really don't see how this is going to help them. With a drone you can look at an accident, but that's about it. Do they expect a flying drone to air-lift someone to a hospital or give that speeding person a ticket? Alos they said something about bridges. Is a flying drone expected to repair a bridge too? If the drone somehow messes up and makes the bridge collapse you could have people with injuries ranging from broken bones to death. This idea doesn't sound too safe or efficient to me.

[Ryda King]

I don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but I will for the sake of my opinion. This country is turning into a nanny state, and quite frankly I'm sick of it.

You're just a crazy conspiracy theorist. Go listen to some more of that insane f*ck Alex Jones, lol.

[Urban Legend]

They could already be flying around, apparently they can't be seen at the height they fly at.

Meh, I was a 15echo in the army...and lets just say social media is a more reliable means of...whatever the f*ck they're trying to do. If not then we'll just say cost effective. Why give away 75k? Fix amerikas weak ass infrastructure. The cameras and yadda yadda is a quarter million should that sh*t fall from the sky...and if it catches fire the general public doesn't know that one good breath of that smoke will f*ck your lunges for life...drones arent flying around civilian airspace that soon. They are HARDLY coordinated to fly in current military airspace where helicopters go and sh*t. What a joke ..

[sivispacem]

For f*cks sake, they aren't f*cking drones. They aren't autonomous. They're piloted remotely. It's exactly the f*cking same as using light aircraft to do it, except if you crash it you don't kill the pilot.

 

They're UAVs. Not drones. UAVs. There's a f*cking intergalactic difference between the two and I'm thoroughly fed up of people confusing them.

 

In my view, if you are resistant to UAVs engaging in civilian activities, then logically you should be resistant to manned aircraft engaging in the same activities because for all intents and purposes they're exactly the damn same. Given that no-one is complaining about the use of light aircraft and helicopters to survey roads, I'll assume that the resistance from most people in the thread is down to the fact that the media don't have the first f*cking clue what's a "drone" and what's a "UAV", and therefore nor do most of the American public.

[Ryda King]

For f*cks sake, they aren't f*cking drones. They aren't autonomous. They're piloted remotely. It's exactly the f*cking same as using light aircraft to do it, except if you crash it you don't kill the pilot.

 

They're UAVs. Not drones. UAVs. There's a f*cking intergalactic difference between the two and I'm thoroughly fed up of people confusing them.

 

In my view, if you are resistant to UAVs engaging in civilian activities, then logically you should be resistant to manned aircraft engaging in the same activities because for all intents and purposes they're exactly the damn same. Given that no-one is complaining about the use of light aircraft and helicopters to survey roads, I'll assume that the resistance from most people in the thread is down to the fact that the media don't have the first f*cking clue what's a "drone" and what's a "UAV", and therefore nor do most of the American public.

You get mad over someone confusing a UAV and a drone...but not over what they're doing with them.

 

Makes sense.

[TheGodDamnMaster]

 

For f*cks sake, they aren't f*cking drones. They aren't autonomous. They're piloted remotely. It's exactly the f*cking same as using light aircraft to do it, except if you crash it you don't kill the pilot.

 

They're UAVs. Not drones. UAVs. There's a f*cking intergalactic difference between the two and I'm thoroughly fed up of people confusing them.

 

In my view, if you are resistant to UAVs engaging in civilian activities, then logically you should be resistant to manned aircraft engaging in the same activities because for all intents and purposes they're exactly the damn same. Given that no-one is complaining about the use of light aircraft and helicopters to survey roads, I'll assume that the resistance from most people in the thread is down to the fact that the media don't have the first f*cking clue what's a "drone" and what's a "UAV", and therefore nor do most of the American public.

I guess I got confused considering the terminology used. If what you say is true, then article should have made it clear there was a difference. And to be honest, I really have no place to be discussing military technology at all, so I renounce my earlier post.

 

I do like reading through the comments section on the Yahoo articles though, so I basically skimmed the article.

Edited January 31, 2013 by whatsstrength

[Dingdongs]

The entire media make the mistake of confusing UAV vs drone... this article isn't going to be the first not to.

 

Anyway, I have no problem with this and think they should be employed in a civilian manner. They can be invaluable from a counterterrorism or counterintelligence standpoint, and this idea that having them somehow puts our rights at risk is just stupid. What exactly is the government going to do? Sexually stalk you via UAV? If that's your concern, don't worry as they operate just like a cop doing surveillance- they cannot take pictures in your backyard nor through windows w/ blinds

[HOW'S ANNIE?]

Jesse Ventura is going to be all over this.

[Finn 7 five 11]

 

For f*cks sake, they aren't f*cking drones. They aren't autonomous. They're piloted remotely. It's exactly the f*cking same as using light aircraft to do it, except if you crash it you don't kill the pilot.

 

They're UAVs. Not drones. UAVs. There's a f*cking intergalactic difference between the two and I'm thoroughly fed up of people confusing them.

 

In my view, if you are resistant to UAVs engaging in civilian activities, then logically you should be resistant to manned aircraft engaging in the same activities because for all intents and purposes they're exactly the damn same. Given that no-one is complaining about the use of light aircraft and helicopters to survey roads, I'll assume that the resistance from most people in the thread is down to the fact that the media don't have the first f*cking clue what's a "drone" and what's a "UAV", and therefore nor do most of the American public.

You get mad over someone confusing a UAV and a drone...but not over what they're doing with them.

 

Makes sense.

Yes, Sivis should be mad at those blasted UAV's inspecting his roads and finding pot-holes to fix..

 

Do you even read things before blurting sh*t out?

 

 

Edited January 31, 2013 by finn4life

[Trund]

 

For f*cks sake, they aren't f*cking drones. They aren't autonomous. They're piloted remotely. It's exactly the f*cking same as using light aircraft to do it, except if you crash it you don't kill the pilot.

 

They're UAVs. Not drones. UAVs. There's a f*cking intergalactic difference between the two and I'm thoroughly fed up of people confusing them.

 

In my view, if you are resistant to UAVs engaging in civilian activities, then logically you should be resistant to manned aircraft engaging in the same activities because for all intents and purposes they're exactly the damn same. Given that no-one is complaining about the use of light aircraft and helicopters to survey roads, I'll assume that the resistance from most people in the thread is down to the fact that the media don't have the first f*cking clue what's a "drone" and what's a "UAV", and therefore nor do most of the American public.

I guess I got confused considering the terminology used. If what you say is true, then article should have made it clear there was a difference. And to be honest, I really have no place to be discussing military technology at all, so I renounce my earlier post.

I don't see what's wrong with the word Drone?

A drone is a pilotless, remote controlled aircraft. That's the definition for it. UAV is basically a synonym for it.

Maybe at the army they separate them, to know whether it's automatic or remote controlled. But even if it's automatic, it can still be remote cotrolled (maybe not by direct input, but you can send it commands), so in the end it's the same.

 

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/drone

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unmanned_aerial_vehicle

[sivispacem]

 

For f*cks sake, they aren't f*cking drones. They aren't autonomous. They're piloted remotely. It's exactly the f*cking same as using light aircraft to do it, except if you crash it you don't kill the pilot.

 

They're UAVs. Not drones. UAVs. There's a f*cking intergalactic difference between the two and I'm thoroughly fed up of people confusing them.

 

In my view, if you are resistant to UAVs engaging in civilian activities, then logically you should be resistant to manned aircraft engaging in the same activities because for all intents and purposes they're exactly the damn same. Given that no-one is complaining about the use of light aircraft and helicopters to survey roads, I'll assume that the resistance from most people in the thread is down to the fact that the media don't have the first f*cking clue what's a "drone" and what's a "UAV", and therefore nor do most of the American public.

You get mad over someone confusing a UAV and a drone...but not over what they're doing with them.

 

Makes sense.

Let me explain in terms you understand.

 

Drones are completely autonomous and basically don't exist.

UAVs are piloted by people on the ground.

 

Various organisations use aircraft with pilots on board to perform tasks outlined above.

They are now suggesting performing the same tasks with aircraft whose pilots are on the ground.

 

 

Would you please care to enlighten me as to what the f*ck the difference between points 3 and 4 are that makes one completely fine and the other a gross violation of civil liberties? It's such an apocalypticly stupid argument that it makes my skull ache. There is, in every conceivable way, absolutely no difference aside from the fact the latter is slightly more reliable and the former considerable safer for the pilot.

 

So instead of defecating in another thread, could you please explain your objection rationally?

 

 

EDIT

_____

 

The words "drone" and "UAV" have become synonymous but that doesn't mean they're the same thing. A drone is pre-programmed and entirely autonomous- it makes decisions about targeting, evasion and threat assessment with no human intervention. Reconaissance craft like the D-21 are drones. There has, to my knowledge, never been a combat drone. In contrast, a UAV is a remotely piloted vehicle. It may be capable of automated flight in the same manner that conventional aircraft use their autopilot, but all mission critical activities are done by the remote pilot- launching weapons, taking photographs, et cetera. UAVs are strategically far more flexible and thus the overwhelming majority of unmanned aircraft are UAVs. "Drones" implies autonomy, which is what people are terrified of. "UAVs" does not. Wonder which one the press prefers...

Edited January 31, 2013 by sivispacem

[nic_23]

so is a drone basically an unmanned aircraft?

 

[sivispacem]

 

so is a drone basically an unmanned aircraft?

 

No. A drone is an autonomous aircraft, either pre-programmed or capable of decision making when in the sair. A UAV is an aircraft piloted remotely. Both are unmanned aircraft, but of very different kinds. is a remote controlled car a robot? That's the analogy I would use.

Edited January 31, 2013 by sivispacem

[Trund]

 

The words "drone" and "UAV" have become synonymous but that doesn't mean they're the same thing. A drone is pre-programmed and entirely autonomous- it makes decisions about targeting, evasion and threat assessment with no human intervention. Reconaissance craft like the D-21 are drones. There has, to my knowledge, never been a combat drone. In contrast, a UAV is a remotely piloted vehicle. It may be capable of automated flight in the same manner that conventional aircraft use their autopilot, but all mission critical activities are done by the remote pilot- launching weapons, taking photographs, et cetera. UAVs are strategically far more flexible and thus the overwhelming majority of unmanned aircraft are UAVs. "Drones" implies autonomy, which is what people are terrified of. "UAVs" does not. Wonder which one the press prefers...

Well, the FAA doesn't use either anymore.

 

This is from the UAS FAQ of the FAA:

 

What is an unmanned aircraft system (UAS)?

 

A UAS is the unmanned aircraft (UA) and all of the associated support equipment, control station, data links, telemetry, communications and navigation equipment, etc., necessary to operate the unmanned aircraft.

The UA is the flying portion of the system, flown by a pilot via a ground control system, or autonomously through use of an on-board computer, communication links and any additional equipment that is necessary for the UA to operate safely.

 

and....

 

 

What is the difference between an Unmanned Aircraft (UA), a Remotely Operated Aircraft (ROA), a Remotely Piloted Vehicle (RPV), and an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle?

Currently the FAA and most of the international community uses the term "UA" or "UAS" for UA System. Previously used terms to identify unmanned aircraft are ROA, RPV, and UAV.

 

 

So funnily, if you want to be 100% correct neither Drone or UAV is correct.

[sivispacem]

UAS refers to the aircraft with armaments. UA is the correct term but the various other 3-letter acronyms are at least acceptable as they clearly refer to the same thing. A "drone" is something completely different. It varies from nation to nation too- the UK's CAA refer to the aircraft as UAVs and the systems including payload as UAS', though use of the former is being phased out currently.

[Trund]

I know what you mean, it's just extremely difficult to distinguish and nearly impossible nowadays.

For example, you say it's an UAV if it's flown by a pilot, but when they switch to autopilot it will become a Drone? Since then it's controlled automatically, and therefore your definition of a Drone will apply.

 

I just read this in this awesome article: http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-...a-drone-anyway/

 

There's more interesting things in it really. I think it makes no sense to argue about such a silly thing.

[sivispacem]

My rule of thumb-

Remotely piloted- UAS

Semi-Autonomous- UAS

Autonomous/Pre-programmed- Drone

[nic_23]

No. A drone is an autonomous aircraft, either pre-programmed or capable of decision making when in the sair. A UAV is an aircraft piloted remotely. Both are unmanned aircraft, but of very different kinds. is a remote controlled car a robot? That's the analogy I would use.

ah i see so a drone is pre programmed?

 

 

also thinking about it having attack drones in foreign countries could be dangerous because it is like they are robots and are not controlled by humans.

[sivispacem]

No. A drone is an autonomous aircraft, either pre-programmed or capable of decision making when in the sair. A UAV is an aircraft piloted remotely. Both are unmanned aircraft, but of very different kinds.  is a remote controlled car a robot? That's the analogy I would use.

ah i see so a drone is pre programmed?

 

 

also thinking about it having attack drones in foreign countries could be dangerous because it is like they are robots and are not controlled by humans.

Or intelligent/self-programming. There are, to the best of my knowledge, no fully autonomous combat unmanned aircraft in existence, and personally given how much cheaper it is to remote control them, plus how much safer and more effective they can be when controlled (more discerning, more analytical) we won't ever see autonomous combat aircraft.

[Celticfang]

My rule of thumb-

Remotely piloted- UAS

Semi-Autonomous- UAS

Autonomous/Pre-programmed- Drone

Going by that, most commerical arliners fall under UAS as they have autopilots that can take off from point A, fly to point B and land on runway C. Even though there's a pilot on board, the computers can manage it all by themselves.

 

A flight crew programs a 737 to fly from (say) London to Berlin completely automatically, but they are there. Is it a UAS or a drone in that case? Or is it a manned aircraft?

[Trund]

My rule of thumb-

Remotely piloted- UAS

Semi-Autonomous- UAS

Autonomous/Pre-programmed- Drone

Going by that, most commerical arliners fall under UAS as they have autopilots that can take off from point A, fly to point B and land on runway C. Even though there's a pilot on board, the computers can manage it all by themselves.

 

A flight crew programs a 737 to fly from (say) London to Berlin completely automatically, but they are there. Is it a UAS or a drone in that case? Or is it a manned aircraft?

I think you totally forgot that a 737 and any other commercial airplane is a manned aircraft.

[Brobinski]

In terms you guys might relate to: Drones are Skynet, UAVs/UASs are really fancy RC planes.

[sivispacem]

 

My rule of thumb-

Remotely piloted- UAS

Semi-Autonomous- UAS

Autonomous/Pre-programmed- Drone

Going by that, most commerical arliners fall under UAS as they have autopilots that can take off from point A, fly to point B and land on runway C. Even though there's a pilot on board, the computers can manage it all by themselves.

 

A flight crew programs a 737 to fly from (say) London to Berlin completely automatically, but they are there. Is it a UAS or a drone in that case? Or is it a manned aircraft?

I think you totally forgot that a 737 and any other commercial airplane is a manned aircraft.

Indeed. The "U" in UAS stands for unmanned. So it seems odd to suggest that a manned aircraft is unmanned because it has autopilot, rather than because it has no pilot.

 

Also, whilst unmanned landing and takeoff capabilities exist in theory, they aren't used in practice. It's far safer to have an actual pilot.