Module 9 - Case Analysis Effectiveness (ASCI 530)

Of all the classes I have completed towards earning my Master’s degree, this by far was the most challenging. This was not due to the difficulty of the assignments, but rather the vast inexperience I have with unmanned aircraft. With that said, I have honestly learned the most from this class through the case analysis. The case analysis allowed me to dive deep and research UAS in a way I would never have (other than watching things blow up on YouTube).

Currently, I am a satellite system operator. In other words, I ensure satellites are healthy and stay in orbit. As the technology of UAS advances and evolves, it will be the use of satellites that assist along the way. However, as of right now the UAS information I learned through the case analysis does not have any utility in my line of work. But in the next year or so, I plan to transition over and become a pilot of unmanned aircraft, or as the U.S. Air Force refers to it, RPA platforms. Knowing this, I purposely steered the research of the case analysis in the direction of the military so I can expand my knowledge and understanding of the field. In this future realm, I fully expect to use all that I have gained from the case analysis (this includes writing capability) to aid in my ability to operate in this relatively new field. The next few years will see an explosion of UAS. My hope is, with the knowledge I have now, I can make a difference in the evolution of the next generations of UAS by providing key information as to why aviation human factor principles must be embedded in the design of the control station.

If given the opportunity to improve the case analysis, I would alter the multimedia project and add more peer-to-peer collaboration. The multimedia project was an interesting way for me to creatively display the case analysis project onto PowerPoint slides to the instructor. However, I feel it did not add to the learning process. As a possible solution, I suggest providing the presentation to the entire class, and perhaps let them grade it. I really appreciated the feedback from my peers on the case analysis draft. Additionally, I liked being able to read their drafts. But, it was the draft. If all students prepared a case analysis presentation for the class, we all could learn much more about the issues with UAS and possible solutions.

Bottom line: I liked the Case Analysis tool. The project allowed me to explore UAS in a way I would not have without the structure and guidance. There are two minor things I would recommend in the future: alter the multimedia project and include more peer-to-peer collaboration.

Module 7 - Request for Proposal (ASCI 530)

MISSION
For the second time in a little over 10 years, the state of Louisiana has been hit hard by flooding. Since the second flooding, which began in early August of 2016, the Louisiana National Guard has been diligently working to provide emergency flood response aid. One area of aid the Louisiana National Guard has been aggressively focused on is the search and rescue of people and animals. To date the Louisiana National Guard has rescued 11,085 people and 1,400 animals (Louisiana National Guard, 2016). They were able to achieve this through their use of various boats, automobiles and helicopters. Despite the fleet of vehicles, the Louisiana National Guard has they are still unable to access certain areas due to vast areas of dangerous terrain. This is where unmanned aerial vehicles or UAVs can assist. UAVs are capable of flying into dangerous terrain, and by using various onboard payloads, can locate victims in hard to reach or difficult to see places. One such example of a UAV assisting with search and rescue happened in 2013. In early May of 2013, a Canadian man was driving on an icy road at night when his vehicle went off the road (Kelly, 2013). The Royal Canadian Mounted Police attempted to use night vision goggles and a helicopter to locate the man, but they were unsuccessful because of the environment in which they were looking. Fortunately, the emergency responders were able to employ an unmanned aircraft with an infrared camera, which was able to detect the man's and point responders in the right location to rescue him (Kelly, 2013).

Based on the evidence of the usefulness of UAVs in search and rescue, the Louisiana National Guard has contracted Green Lantern Aviation to design a UAV to meet their search and rescue needs.

DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS AND DECISIONS
In order to design the most efficient UAV for the Louisiana National Guard, there are some design considerations and decisions that must be made. First, in order to prevent the cost and time of designing an unmanned aerial system or UAS from the ground up, most of the components of the UAS will be acquired commercially off the shelf. The aircraft itself will be a form of a quadcopter, similar to Microdrones MD4-100 (Microdrones, n.d.). This type of aircraft will provide the best capability for the Louisiana National Guard to hover and perform agile maneuvering in small spaces to search for people and animals (Arain & Moeini, 2016). However, in order for all the components to work, each system module (e.g. C2, Payload, Data-link, etc.) must be designed/acquired with a plug and play mindset. By keeping down the cost it will allow the Louisiana National Guard to purchase more UAS to provide the best coverage during national disasters, such as flooding.

Another design decision/consideration are the dual cameras onboard the UAV. There will be a daytime camera, capable of a 1080p resolution. There will also be an IR camera which will have at least a 640p resolution. The resolution on the IR camera can be lower than the daytime camera because the sensitivity of the IR camera can be adjusted depending on the UAV surroundings (e.g. smoke, bodies of water, dry land, etc.). However, regardless of the camera, the control station will be able to easily switch between both while providing the operator the ability to overlay map and GPS data over the video feed.
Furthermore, the entire UAS will be designed to have multiple levels of redundancy. This includes the ability to change out components without affecting operability and multiple ways to control the aircraft. One novel feature to the redundancy will be the emergency control unit. In the case of an extreme in-flight emergency, operators will be able to control the aircraft, but only the aircraft, back to a rescue location.

Lastly, because the UAS is an aircraft at its core, there are some licensing/certification decisions that must be made. They are:

• The UAS will be operating only within the U.S. (Some countries require permission before unmanned aircraft can operate at all, such as Nepal (Ferris-Rotman, 2015). Therefore the Louisiana National Guard will refrain from providing the UAS to other nations.
• The UAS will not be operating in the national airspace, however, it will be partnered with an existing emergency responder entity that has legally obtained a certificate of authorization to operate UAS

Baseline Requirements
1    Command & Control (C2)   1.1    Shall be capable of manual and autonomous operation
      1.1.1    [Derived requirement] – C2 control station shall provide an input method for operator to set parameters for autonomous operation (e.g. required altitude, heading, etc.)
      1.1.2     [Derived requirement] – C2 control station shall have specific buttons/switches that allow operator to switch between manual and autonomous mode
      1.1.3    [Derived requirement] – C2 control station shall display the mode the aircraft is currently in.
   1.2    Shall provide redundant flight control to prevent flyway
      1.2.1    [Derived requirement] – C2 shall provide more than one method to operate the air vehicle (e.g. control via a laptop computer or joystick).
      1.2.2    [Derived requirement] – C2 shall provide the ability to quickly swap out components (e.g. laptops, control surfaces, batteries, etc.) without affecting operations.
      1.2.3    [Derived requirement] – C2 shall provide connectivity to an emergency control unit in case the main GCS becomes inoperable
   1.3    Shall visually depict telemetry of air vehicle element
      1.3.1    [Derived requirement] – C2 control station shall provide the standard six-pack instrumentation (i.e. altitude indicator, heading indicator, airspeed indicator, vertical speed indicator, turn coordinator, attitude indicator)
      1.3.2    [Derived requirement] – C2 control station shall provide state of health information (e.g. voltage, amperage, internal temperature, external temperature, etc.)
   1.4    Shall visually depict payload sensor views
      1.4.1    [Derived requirement] – C2 control station shall provide digital detail enhancement (i.e. digital video stabilization, digital zoom, etc)
      1.4.2    [Derived requirement] – C2 control station shall have a command which will switch between Daytime and IR camera
      1.4.3    [Derived requirement] – C2 control station shall be able to overlay data over the payload sensor view (e.g. radiometric, position/map, etc.)

2     Payload
   2.1    Shall be capable of color daytime video operation up to 500 feet AGL
      2.1.1    [Derived requirement] – Daytime camera shall provide a video resolution of at least 1280 x 720
      2.1.2    [Derived requirement] – Daytime camera shall provide a video frame rate of 60 fps
   2.2    Shall be capable of infrared (IR) video operation to 500 feet AGL
      2.2.1    [Derived requirement] – IR camera shall provide a video resolution of at least 640 x 512.
      2.2.2    [Derived requirement] – IR camera shall provide a video frame rate of 30 fps.
      2.2.3    [Derived requirement] – IR camera shall be able to manually set the temperature sensitivity via GCS software.
   2.3    Shall be interoperable with C2 and data-link
      2.3.1    [Derived requirement] – Payload shall be connected directly to  the air vehicle via a plug and play wiring harness
      2.3.2    [Derived requirement] – Payload shall encode video and auditory data in a format that requires the least amount of bandwidth (e.g. MP4)
      2.3.3    [Derived requirement] – Payload shall be operated through the GCS using open source software.
   2.4    Shall use power provided by air vehicle element
      2.4.1    [Derived requirement] – Payload shall match the type of electrical system as the air vehicle element (i.e. AC or DC)
      2.4.2    [Derived requirement] – Payload shall require no more than 15 volts

3    Data Link (communications)
   3.1    Shall be capable of communication range exceeding two miles visual line of sight (VLOS)
      3.1.1    [Derived requirement] – The data link shall primarily utilize HF radio transmission
   3.2    Shall provide redundant communication capability (backup) for C2
      3.2.1    [Derived requirement] – The data link shall broadcast data via at least three antennas
      3.2.2    [Derived requirement] – The data link shall have at least one medium frequency / low power antenna
      3.2.3    [Derived requirement] – The data link shall contain be operable on at least 5 different frequencies.
   3.3    Shall use power provided by air vehicle element
      3.3.1    [Derived requirement] – The data link shall require no more than 3 volts
      3.3.2    [Derived requirement] – The data link shall have a dedicated battery backup

Baseline Testing
1.    Command & Control (C2)
   1.1.    Test control station ability to control aircraft using the various control methods
   1.2.    Test “swap-ability” of various components (e.g. laptops, control surfaces, batteries, etc.) without affecting operations.
   1.3.    Verify control station’s presentation of required aircraft telemetry
   1.4.    Verify control station’s ability to display and control the payloads
   1.5.    Verify human factor issues with C2 operation (e.g. button placement, GUI colors, etc.)

2.    Payload
   2.1.    Test ability to control both cameras from control station
   2.2.    Test average payload video and audio bandwidth output
   2.3.    Verify resolution and frame rate of daytime and IR cameras

3.    Data Link (communications)
   3.1.    Test operability of all antennas
   3.2.    Test maximum range of aircraft in normal conditions
   3.3.    Test maximum range of aircraft under less-than-ideal conditions (i.e. rain, snow, poor terrain)
   3.4.    Test backup frequency aircraft control capability
   3.5.    Verify backup battery ability to power low power telemetry transmissions

SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT
In order to provide the best product in the least amount of time to the Louisiana National Guard, a prototype model of system development will be used. This model will allow the Green Lantern Aviation designers the opportunity to truly understand what the Louisiana National Guard UAV requirements are. Additionally, by building a prototype, and then refining the prototype, the Louisiana National Guard can identify what functionality and capability they actually need from the aircraft. While there are disadvantages to using this model; the disadvantages should be minimal due to the specific nature of the search and rescue request. Based on initial estimates, Green Lantern Aviation believes that the development of the search and rescue UAS should take approximately 13 months. This is due to through ground testing of the control station software, data link operability and payload capability. The testing strategy is to individually test the various subsystems, then test their ability to integrate as a system, and then finally certify the entire system in accordance with the Louisiana National Guard’s requirements and FAA policy.

Phase of Development                                                           Approximate Time Frame
System Development                                                                          4 Months
Ground Testing (subsystem and integration testing)                          6 Months
In-Flight Testing (system certification)                                              3 Months

References
Arain, F., & Moeini, S. (2016). Leveraging on Unmanned Ariel Vehicle (UAV) for Effective Emergency Response and Disaster Management. World Conference on Disaster Management (pp. 1 - 11). Toronto: Alberta Institute of Technology. Retrieved from http://pmsymposium.umd.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Arian_Moeini.pdf
Baban, N. S. (2013, June). Processing Models Of SDLC . Airoli, Navi Mumbai, India.
Ferris-Rotman, A. (2015, May 07). How Drones Are Helping Nepal Recover From The Earthquake. Retrieved from Huffington Post.com: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/07/nepal-earthquake-drones_n_7232764.html
Kelly, H. (2013, May 23). Drones: The future of disaster response. Retrieved from CNN.com: http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/23/tech/drones-the-future-of-disaster-response/
Louisiana National Guard. (2016, August 18). Louisiana National Guard Continues Flood Response Missions. Retrieved from U.S. Department of Defense: http://www.defense.gov/News/Article/Article/918383/louisiana-national-guard-continues-flood-response-missions
Microdrones. (n.d.). Microdrones MD4-1000: Robust and Powerful UAV Model. Retrieved from Micro Drones: https://www.microdrones.com/en/products/md4-1000/

Module 5 - UAS Mission (ASCI 530)

   

     Since the Coast Guards inception in 1790, it has been charged with protecting the nation’s waterways and to prevent the illegal import of items into the nation. This daunting task does require a lot of manpower, good intelligence and a bit of luck. Of all the missions that the Coast Guard is responsible for, it is law enforcement, specifically the tracking and interdiction of unregulated items, which is the most challenging to conduct. It is the most difficult because of the vast area the Coast Guard must patrol, and the reach they have if suspicious activity is detected. To ease the burden of tracking and stopping illegal activity like drug smuggling in all of the country’s waterways, the Coast Guard is actively looking at incorporating unmanned aerial systems into their fleet of aircraft. Unmanned aircraft provide the Coast Guard a cost effective solution to have a persistent eye in the sky in order to expand maritime domain awareness and proliferate valuable data and images regarding maritime hazards and threats (U.S. Coast Guard, 2016). According to an April 2016 article in Navy Times by Meghann Myers, the Coast Guard is not picky in terms of a fixed-wing or rotary-wing unmanned aircraft, they simply need a UAS that can be operated for 12 hours and has the capability to operate at an altitude of roughly 5,000 ft. (Myers, 2016). Due to the different locations, the UAS may have to travel, the Coast Guard will need an unmanned platform capable of incorporating various payload packages and be able to operate in bad weather. Specifically, the chosen unmanned platform will need to be equipped with an electro-optical, thermal and synthetic aperture radar camera payload package (Austin, 2010, p. 275). With regards to the law enforcement of the United States’ waterways, three particular unmanned aerial vehicles may be of assistance to the Coast Guard. They are the MQ-1 Predator, the MQ-8C Fire Scout, and the ScanEagle. When the term UAS is used in conjunction with law enforcement and surveillance, one the first platforms that come to mind is the MQ-1 Predator.
    The MQ-1 Predator is a proven long endurance, medium altitude aircraft. The aircraft more than achieves the design requirements for the Coast Guard’s law enforcement mission an operating altitude of 25,000ft and a range of 400 nm (Kable, 2016). Additionally, the MQ-1 Predator is capable of over 40 hours of operation time. Through the use of line-of-sight radio communication and beyond line-of-sight satellite communication, this platform can be operated from a variety of locations (Kable, 2016). Furthermore, the MQ-1 Predator is capable of carrying the required camera payloads. However, considering the current fiscal constraints of the U.S. government, the Coast Guard is looking for an unmanned platform that can do much more than one mission of law enforcement. Sadly, the MQ-1 Predator is only capable of accomplishing a few of the Coast Guard missions. This is where the MQ-8 Fire Scout may have the advantage.
    The MQ-8 Fire Scout is a multipurpose and flexible platform. The MQ-8 Fire Scout is a rotary-wing unmanned platform capable of operating at altitudes as high as 16,000 ft. (Northrop Grumman, 2015). The platform is able to operate for 12 hours with an approximate range of 1,227 nautical miles (Northrop Grumman, 2015). Similar to the MQ-1 Predator, the MQ-8 Fire Scout is also able to carry a vast assortment of payload sensors. Despite the different types of payload sensors the aircraft can carry, the MQ-8 Fire Scout can easily operate from land bases or sea-going vessels. This flexibility gives the platform the ability to accomplish most of the missions the Coast Guard has. Another, unmanned platform that may serve as a solution to the Coast Guard is the ScanEagle.
    The ScanEagle is a tried and tested medium-range unmanned aircraft. The ScanEagle is capable of both land and sea launch through the use of a pneumatically operated catapult system can increase the law enforcement flexibility for the Coast Guard. Additionally, the ScanEagle can operate for 25 plus hours with an approximate range of 1,500 nautical miles and operate at altitudes as high as 16,000 ft.  (Kable, 2016). The ScanEagle is a prime aircraft for the Coast Guard because of the “plug and play” nature of the payload packages. The payload is housed in the nose of the aircraft and can be changed out for another payload package in the matter of a few minutes. But before the Coast Guard decides which UAS to go with, they must determine what the benefits and challenges are with using UAS for law enforcement of U.S. waters.
If employed properly, unmanned aircraft provide the Coast Guard with a wide-ranging capability to provide law enforcement. Simply by adding unmanned aircraft to the fleet, the Coast Guard can extend the range/area the can patrol looking for illegal activity. In fact, in the early part of 2016, the Coast Guard was able to detect and track a drug-running submarine using a borrowed UAS from the U.S. Custom and Border Patrol (Myers, 2016). The use of borrowed UAS allowed the Coast Guard to surveille a larger area and respond with an armed cutter to enforce U.S. law. Despite the clear benefits of using unmanned aircraft, there are also clear challenges to using unmanned platforms for law enforcement.
The Coast Guard has a few challenges with the operation of UAS for as a tool to aid in law enforcement. At least within the bounds of U.S. airspace, the Coast Guard would currently have issues operating their UAS. This is due to the current rules limiting the use of unmanned aircraft within the national airspace, or NAS. Specifically for the Coast Guard, the potential to conduct surveillance at altitudes around 5,000 ft. creates a concern for manned aircraft which can see-and-avoid other aircraft. On a different note, the U.S. military currently uses armed UAS to detect, track and engage various targets around the globe. For the Coast Guard, the potential exists for them to do the same with any of the above-mentioned unmanned aircraft. Especially, considering that many of the Coast Guard surveillance areas may overlap with other sovereign nations, this may be a potential challenge regarding international relations. Another series of challenges for the Coast Guard are the potential ethical concerns. Ethically, in addition to having armed unmanned platforms patrolling over U.S. airspace, there has been large concerns with law enforcement gathering blanket data and images of American citizens. This invasion of privacy has been the sensitive subject for all entities wishing to use UAS in a greater capacity. However, because the Coast Guard is part of the Department of Homeland Security, there may be extra worries over the concept of “big brother.”