Transcript Robotic Aircraft for Public Safety (RAPS)

ROBOTIC AIRCRAFT FOR
PUBLIC SAFETY (RAPS)
OVERVIEW
Kirk Kloeppel
4 June 2014
UAS or “DRONE”
2
Introduction
• RAPS Purpose
– To provide potential users (public, first responder organizations and
others) with information needed to make informed decisions on
acquiring and deploying SUAS to save lives and protect property
– RAPS testing focuses on fire response, search and rescue operations,
HAZMAT response, border security, natural disasters, and law
enforcement
– RAPS provides a unique ‘Consumer Reports’ data base; our products
are unbiased, third-party evaluations of current and emerging SUAS
technologies
• Impact – RAPS directly benefits
– Users and manufacturers
– FAA by making important contributions toward establishing
performance standards and best-practice guidelines
3
Approach
• Evaluate performance and
utility of mature, DODdeveloped SUAS-sensor
combinations using:
– Key capability measures
– One test – ours – applied
uniformly to all systems
evaluated
– Realistic operational
scenarios and environments
– Test reports produced for
each system tested
4
Key Test Factors
• Operational capabilities
– Example: Does SUAS support
routine operations by improving
situational awareness?
• Operational utility
– Example: Is SUAS easy and
efficient to assemble, launch,
operate, recover, and pack up?
– Example: Is video output seen
effectively at multiple remote
terminals?
• Technology transition
– Example: Is FAA authorization
permitting SUAS operation in
the NAS likely?
5
Scope
• Test categories
– Scripted operational scenarios
– Operational utility assessments
– Use in National Airspace System
• Technical scope
– Daytime testing, < 400 ft, < 25 lb
• RAMPS: Robotic Aircraft for
Maritime Public Safety
– New S&T-USCG RDC partnership to
test SUAS for maritime applications
• New/future capabilities
– Onboard collision avoidance;
counter-spoofing; severe storm
response
6
Border Security
– Rapid response
̶ Improved situational awareness and agent safety
̶ High-value assets in remote, inaccessible, dangerous AORs
– Relatively low unit costs could provide:
̶ Many more air assets for target identification and tracking
̶ Eventually, complete aerial coverage of the U.S. border
7
7
RAPS Test Range
Oklahoma Training Center – Unmanned Systems (OTC-US)
Location: Elgin, OK, adjacent to Ft. Sill U.S. Army Post and within Ft. Sill restricted airspace
OTC-US site (red outline)
OTC-US is a test facility of the Oklahoma State
University’s University Multispectral Laboratory
“Liberty City” site (urban scenarios)
8
Vendor Participation
• We developed 21 Performance Goals
(see Back-Up) and released an RFI (Sept.
2012) inviting manufacturer
participation: 72 white papers received
• S&T–Manufacturer CRADAs enable
testing
̶ No exchange of funds
̶ Vendors provide: SUAS, sensors; pilots, sensor
operators, flight support team and equipment
• To date, 15 CRADAs for testing 26 SUAS
DHS S&T is leveraging hundreds of millions of dollars of SUAS technology developed
by DOD and the IC, including tens of millions of dollars of industry IR&D investments
9
Test Reports
• Reports
– Created by S&T RAPS team for users
– Approved for release by DHS S&T
– Posted and archived online
• Websites and access
– Gov’t employees & gov’t-sponsored
stakeholders access RAPS Reports via
http://www.firstresponder.gov
S&T Communities of Practice site,
https://communities.firstresponder.gov
RAPS Community of Practice site
– Access controlled by S&T & RAPS PM
10
Test Reports, cont’d
• Test Reports
̶ Content: Complete test results, including scoring summary tables; general
SUAS information; company-proprietary cost and other information
̶ Audience: Restricted to government employees and government-sponsored
stakeholders interested in RAPS (potential users)
̶ Access to Test Reports:
• Available upon request to RAPS Program Manager
• Available online at Robotic Aircraft for Public Safety (RAPS) Secure
Community of Practice website
• Executive Summaries of Test Reports
̶ Content: Highlights of test results (non-proprietary; company-approved)
̶ Audience: Approved for public release (goal: to reach a wide readership)
̶ Access to Executive Summaries:
• Available upon request to RAPS Program Manager
• Available online at Robotic Aircraft for Public Safety (RAPS)
Community of Practice website
11
Rating Summaries
To facilitate SUAS comparisons, each Report contains Rating Summaries of results in
our 54 Performance Measures in 5 Assessment categories: A1. Law Enforcement; A2.
Search and Rescue; A3. Fire Response; A4. Operational Utility; A5. Operation in NAS
Above: Sample Rating summary information
Performance Measure (PM)
Unit, Rating (bar-graph), T & O markers
Qual., Quant. Rating
Scoring Keys for
Qualitative and
Quantitative Ratings
12
RAPS Schedule (Cycle 1)
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Lockheed Martin ADP
AeroVironment
Platform(s)
Stalker (Blk 15),
Stalker XE (Blk 10)
Puma AE, Raven B,
Wasp AE (Blk IV)
Report
Online
2
Dec. 10-14,
2012
Jan.14-18,
2013
Mar. 11-15,
2013
Apr. 15-19,
2013
May 13-17,
2013
June 10-14,
2013
June 17-21,
2013
July 15-19,
2013
Aug. 26-30,
2013
Company
Rotary
1
Test
Date
Fixed
Test
Week
√
√
√
√
T-Hawk (Blk II)
√
√
Avenger; R.A.P.T.R.
√
√
Aeryon Labs
Scout V1, SkyRanger
√
√
UAS Dynamics
Skylark
√
Lockheed Martin MS2
Desert Hawk III,
Desert Hawk-EER, Indago
√
√
√
Mission Technology
Systems, LLC
Buster
√
AeroVironment
Qube, Shrike
Honeywell
Leptron
(Tactical Electronics)
√
13
RAPS Schedule (Cycle 1)
12
13
14
N/A
15
16
17
Company
Platform(s)
AirRobot
AR100B, AR100C, AR200
Prioria
Maverick, VMAV
√
Falcon UAS
Falcon
√
Applied Research Assoc.
Nighthawk
√
AirCover/Lockheed Martin
QR425
√
CBP (PSI Tactical)
InstantEye
√
UAV Solutions
Talon, Allerion, Phoenix30
√
Stark Aerospace
BirdEye 400, Mini-Panther
√
Aurora
Skate
√
Report
Online
11
Sept. 9-13,
2013
Oct. 21-25,
2013
Dec. 9-13,
2013
Jan. 13-17,
2014
Jan. 27-31,
2014
April 14-25,
2014
May 12-16,
2014
May 19-23,
2014
June 16-20,
2014
Rotary
10
Test
Date
Fixed
Test
Week
√
√
√
14
Lessons Learned
• No one platform performs well in all scenarios
• Fixed-wing aircraft:
̶ Very good in search and rescue (SAR), fire monitoring
̶ Some fixed wing SUAS need operating areas > 200 ft radius
• Launch and recovery zones
• Deep stall landings affected by winds
• Rotary-winged aircraft:
̶ Perform well in crime, accident, and arson scene investigation, and in SWAT
̶ Hover ability is very beneficial
̶ Some systems are relatively quiet, providing stealth, and can “perch”
̶ Up to 50-min endurance was tested/verified – winds are not a limiting factor
(flying in winds up to 30 mph)
̶ In winds, maintain commanded flight profiles better than fixed wing aircraft
15
Lessons Learned, cont’d
• Essential capabilities for effective, high-use operations:
̶ Integrated EO and IR sensors on a stabilized, gimbaled platform
• SAR aided by ability to switch between two modes to validate Targets of
Interest (TOI)
• Dual sensors are valuable in urban scenarios where shadows are prevalent
̶ Geo-referenced EO and IR full motion video
• Needed for chain of custody and TOI location accuracy
• Collision avoidance:
̶ For some systems, the best way to avoid oncoming traffic may be to initiate
immediate landing – but climb and descend speeds may not be sufficient to
avoid collision
• Other findings:
̶ Quiet systems developed by DOD may need audible augmentation during SAR
̶ The fuel cell SUAS we tested is a significant new capability: > 8 hr endurance
• Note to potential users: It requires > 12 min for warm-up prior to launch
16
Future Outlook
Cycle 1, FY2012-14
• 2012
– Range selection; advocacy
– Define program scope and set key
partnerships
– RFI; Test Plan; contracting
• Stand up:
– Processes to work with
manufacturers, create and
disseminate reports
– Liaison to DHS privacy working
group
• Conduct 19 flight test weeks
• Analyze and disseminate results
from Cycle 1 testing
Cycle 2, FY2015-16
• New RFI; new Test Plan
• Expanded test scope (goals):
– Fire/HAZMAT/disaster, SAR
response
– Specialized SUAS sensors
– Larger, more complex operational
scenarios
– Counter-spoofing and antijamming capabilities
– Airworthiness
• Severe storm response pilot
– RAMPS new start: Maritime
testing, USCG RDC-led
collaboration
– Transition Plan for future funding
and management structure
17
Project Office, Web Links
RAPS Project Support Officer:
–
Mr. Kevin Spence: (202) 254-2235
[email protected]
RAPS and related Web Links:
–
http://www.firstresponder.gov is a public-access DHS S&T website
–
Government employees and government-sponsored stakeholders interested in RAPS may
request access to the RAPS Test Reports via http://www.firstresponder.gov, which is the
gateway to access S&T’s First Responder Communities of Practice site,
https://communities.firstresponder.gov, which is the gateway to the RAPS Community of
Practice site. Access is controlled by DHS S&T and the RAPS Program Manager.
–
RAPS Request for information (RFI), released September 24, 2012:
https://www.fbo.gov/spg/DHS/OCPO/DHS-OCPO/DHS13-01/listing.html
• RAPS Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA), approved Nov. 16, 2012, was the first such
document addressing unmanned aircraft ever published – anywhere in the world:
http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/privacy/PIAs/privacy_pia_st_
raps_nov2012.pdf
18
SUAS Performance Goals
Common Requirements:
Threshold
Objective
Lost Link Procedures
Airframe Accumulated Flight Time
Sensors
Sensors (EO/IR)
Laser Designation
Training (operator)
Deployment
Recovery
Assembly
Ready to launch (after assembly)
Mean time between lost link
Airworthiness–Operator’s Manual
Airworthiness–Maintenance Manual
Weight (MTO)
Rally Point
> 200 hr (rotary); > 500 hr (fixed)
Electro-optical and infrared
Fixed
None
One week
Bungee/catapult launch
Line/net capture
< 5 min
< 5 min
> 100 hr flight time
Provide written Operator’s Manual
Provide written Maintenance Manual
< 25 pounds
Rally Point, after time return to launch
> 400 hr (rotary); > 1,000 hr (fixed)
Chemical/biological/radiological
Gimbaled
Laser spotter integrated
One day
Hand launched
Deep stall/hover
< 1 min
< 1 min
> 250 hr flight time
Provide written Operator’s Manual
Provide written Maintenance Manual
< 25 pounds
Rotary-winged UAS: Threshold Objective
Fixed-winged UAS:
Threshold
Objective
Endurance
Range
Speed (dash)
Speed (endurance)
Altitude
Service Ceiling
Acoustic signature (400 ft AGL)
Endurance
Range
Speed (dash)
Speed (endurance)
Altitude
Service Ceiling
Acoustic signature (400 ft AGL)
30 min
1 mi
20 mph
15 mph
400 ft AGL
6,000 ft MSL
70 dBA
2 hr
3 mi
40 mph
30 mph
1000 ft AGL
10,000 ft MSL
40 dBA
30 min
0.25 mi
10 mph
0 mph
400 ft AGL
6,000 ft MSL
70 dBA
1 hr
1 mi
30 mph
20 mph
1000 ft AGL
10,000 ft MSL
40 dBA
20
RAPS STEERING GROUP
Dr. John Appleby, Chair
DHS S&T HSARPA
Mr. Bob Griffin, Director
DHS S&T First Responder Group
Mr. Jonathan Cantor
DHS Chief Privacy Officer (Act.)
Ms. Tamara Kessler, Chief (Act.)
DHS Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties
Mr. John Priddy, Director
DHS Customs and Border Protection (CBP)/ Air Operations
Capt Doug Nash, Chief
DHS U.S. Coast Guard/ Office of Aviation Forces
Mr. Chris Vaughan
DHS Federal Emergency Management Admin./ Geospatial Management Office
Mr. Jim Williams, Director
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)/ UAS Integration Office
Mr. David Morton
FAA/ UAS Integration Office, Aviation Safety Inspector
Mr. Steve Pansky
FAA/ UAS Integration Office, Senior ATC Analyst
Dr. Steve McKeever
Oklahoma State Univ./ VP for Science &Technol. Transfer; UML/ Executive Director
Mr. Eric Meyn, Director
University Multispectral Laboratories (UML)/ Unmanned Systems Division
Chief Robert Doke
Oklahoma State Fire Marshall
Chief Jon Hansen
Director, Oklahoma Council On Firefighter Training (COFT)
LTC Jon Greenhaw
Oklahoma National Guard
Mr. Mike O’Shea
Department of Justice/ Office of Justice Programs
Cmdr Bob Osborne (ret.)
Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department
Chief Donald Shinnamon, Sr. (ret.)
Public Safety Aviation Consultant
Mr. Andy Lacher
MITRE Corporation/ UAS Integration Research Strategist
21
PRIVACY
http://www.gigapixel.com/image/gigapan-canucks-g7.html
22