KPRC Local 2 shots of secret test
The Federal Aviation Administration has been flooded with requests from police departments throughout the United States to use drones to fly on patrol, since a secret test of the technology was captured in Houston.
Blogs and radio talk shows from around the globe have focused their attention on the Houston test this week, saturating the KPRC Local 2 newsroom with e-mails about the controversy.
This is what a 'free press' is all about--alerting the people of all dangers that may threaten them--particularly from their own government," one viewer wrote today.
The investigative team from KPRC-TV, owned by Post Newsweek Stations (A Washington Post company), had camera crews hidden in bushes, hidden in cars and neighboring properties, and a news helicopter was hidden nearby to jump into action when police launched a drone test. The Houston Police Department invited law enforcement personnel and other dignitaries from all over Texas but the invitation was marked, "No Media Allowed."
KPRC Local 2 shots of launch pad dignitaries
Those dignitaries and police gathered around a launchpad and a large truck with revolving radar in the middle of a farm field about 70 miles northwest of Houston. Then, an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) known as the Scan Eagle from Boeing's subsidiary "Insitu" was launched into the sky.
Police cars had blocked the country driveway with officers manning a checkpoint to carefully verify that those entering were invited. Then, after the launch, when police saw KPRC-TV's cameras emerge and helicopter take flight, officers threatened the news crews by saying a no fly zone was in place, which was false.
While the rural location usually sees very little air traffic, pilots who take off and land from nearby airports said they had no idea that an unmanned police drone may be flying near them. News cameras spotted two airplanes within a few miles, but local air traffic control towers said they had no information about the police test. Pilots who were flying nearby were kept in the dark.
Pilots expressed concerns about the test, but also the notion of police departments using this unmanned aircraft technology on a larger scale in the future. Members of the Airline Owners & Pilots Association trade group were weighing in on their industry's message board today as well.
While drones typically receive coverage in war zones, the KPRC-TV report highlighted one crash of a different model drone on a law enforcement mission on US soil. Pilots and other experts are afraid a similar malfunction over an urban area could send a drone crashing into a house or an airliner.
In recent days, the Federal Aviation Administration has said it's in the process of drafting rules that will govern how local police agencies can use drones. A rule-making committee has submitted a draft of what technical issues should be addressed by those regulations, and it has raised a number of safety threats that should be covered by the rules. The FAA says that report is finished.
Possibly reacting to the recent blogs and international attention on this subject, the FAA has released a new "fact sheet" on police using drones. It asserts,
The FAA's main concern about UAS operations in civil airspace is safety. It is critical that these vehicles do not endanger other users of the National Airspace System or compromise the safety of anyone on the ground."
The FAA said there are 188 applications for temporary applications pending, which could cover additional test flights like the one captured on camera in Houston. There were at least 89 temporary certificates for drone flights issued in the 2009 Fiscal Year, according to FAA.
While the fact sheet did not break down the purpose of those Certificates of Authority (COA's), they typically cover wildfire or forest fire supression efforts, Customs & Border Protection flights along US borders or other temporary public safety needs like searches for missing persons.
Supporters say drones were a huge help in California wildfires and in Hurricane rescues in past years, so they are pointing to those successes in their push for permanent approval. And, a California search group called KPRC-TV this week, hoping to weigh in on the debate, saying drones could be a valuable tool for them when kids are missing or elderly are lost.
The New York Times reported recently that the FBI has requested the ability to use drones as part of its arsenal. Dozens of other local police agencies have applied to the FAA to use drones since this report first hit the airwaves.
The drone that was tested in Houston weighs about 40 pounds. It can carry another 15 pounds of police gear, which could include weaponry. This aircraft model can stay in the air 15 to 24 hours without landing. The rotor UAV that was tested over Florida was much lighter in weight, and can fly vertically with hover capabilities like a helicopter.
The FAA's new fact sheet says a proposed rule should be published in the coming months of spring, while the final rule should be in place next year, governing the rules all police agencies would need to follow in order to launch their own drones.
Police are being very vague about how they will use UAVs. When the secret test showed up on the news in Houston, an executive assistant police chief quickly called a news conference to diffuse the story. While KPRC-TV was showing the black vehicles with radars spinning and a drone flying into the air, this HPD official was able to manage the story on the other stations, describing how harmless it is.
Executive Assistant Chief Martha Montalvo with the Houston Police Department said,
Potential public safety applications include mobility, evacuation, homeland security, search and rescue, as well as tactical."
Many Houston PD officers who attended the secret test were from the traffic and radar task force, which handle traffic enforcement duties. When pressed by the KPRC reporter about whether drones were destined for ticketing speeding motorists, she answered,
I'm not ruling anything out."
The manufacturer of the Houston drone, Insitu, was purchased by Boeing after the televised test. The company stands to rake in millions when police departments around the country get approval to purchase and use these aircraft on patrol. The company had issued a news release after the Houston test, describing how the aircraft have many safeguards to address the various concerns about crashes. That news release can no longer be found on Insitu's site.
Constitutional law professors and legal observers are also carefully watching the police drone debate. South Texas College of Law professor Rocky Rhodes, who specializes in constitutional law, reacted to the test, saying,
We see that some of these technologies that are being used in the aftermath of 9/11, that we thought were necessary to protect our security in that time, are now being used to diminish privacy in other contexts, and that is extremely worrisome."
HPD said the legal issues would be worked out after the tests are finished and the drones are launched over the city. Professor Rhodes said,
One issue is going to be law enforcement using this and when, by using these drones, are they conducting a search, which they would need probable cause or a warrant."
So far, the FAA says it has issued 60 licenses for 17 different UAV models during this study period of police using drones. All of those licenses, known as airworthiness certificates, are categorized as "experimental" for the time being, which means there are additional requirements for paperwork and technical evaluation until an aircraft is taken off experimental status
In the FAA's new fact sheet, the main safety factor that is addressed over and over again is the same concern that was raised in the KPRC-TV report. Pilots said drones have no way of handling the "see and avoid" precautions that all other pilots are required to follow as a primary rule.
All pilots know this "see and avoid" rule means they must constantly look out for other aircraft and work to avoid a collision course with the other aircraft.
Veteran pilots say, regardless of how attentive a ground crew is while operating the remote controls for a UAV, they cannot "see and avoid" other aircraft. After all, the camera only looks in one direction and any onboard radar may miss other approaching aircraft, depending on altitude or distance from the drone.
The FAA says its advisory committee is working on that primary question as the rules are being drafted for police departments throughout the nation.
The FAA has not released a list of the US police departments that have applied to use drones once they are approved.
For more info: FAA's latest publication on police drone use
Comments
The helicopter that flew to cover this flight is more capable of spying on people with it's big camera AND IT IS CAPABLE of carrying weapons... hand-held guns... just like police helicopters. The ScanEagle CANNOT carry weapons and it can't carry 15 pounds of police gear. There are methods available for see-and-avoid. You are talking to the wrong people. Pilots of manned aircraft usually aren't aware of the technology involved in flying UA.
Whomever wrote this DID NOT do their research. So, yes the free-press is capable of protecting our freedom but most of this article ignorant babble. This is fear-mongering.
You are so naive and totally blind. You haven't even been paying attention to that which was going on in Iraq. You had better be reading between the lines on this. If you notice this police captain or whatever her level said we're not leaving anything out and they are already using these in other cities and as the reporter towards the end said , one in another city crashed and it's not to catch speeders. In our city we're looking at putting up not only cameras at every stop light and intersection but now the technology as used in Russia and Germany allows for the listening devices to be used where you can hear conversations in a car coming down the road over a mile away. This is also on the docket to be installed here. This plane has the same technology that the ZBV Backscatter Van has. Just a smaller version. Good luck with your passive life. They didn't say they were carrying weapons on this it's surveilance only in this model.
We alreqdy fly drones on the Canadian boarder for security and the FAA is involved in testing in a National Airspace and now drones are being moved to Haiti to help with the relief effort we are going through a natural progression of technology being used to advance security and safety.
This test took place more than two years ago.
Nothing really to see here. The COA's or (Certificate of Authorization), given to police departments are so restrictive they render the Unmanned Aircraft almost useless.
I agree, this article is a very poor example of press abuse. And this test did take place several years ago. The facts about the aircrafts capabilities are wrong an up to date list of what it can carry and do are readily available on Insitus website and the press wasn't invited to avoid this stupid article. The airspace was restricted with a COA which the article talks much about so why they missed that after talking at so much length about is beyond me. If piolots didn't know about it it's because they didn't read advisories so let do an article on irresponcilbe pilots and not this poorly represented subject.
This article is an unfortunate example of incompetence. Is the news world really hurting that bad for stuff to write about? Seriously, "nothing going on today so lets take an old event, make up some stuff and see if we can stir up some controversy."
What I find most interesting is the facts are out dated, the triggering event is outdated, his "sources" are not actual users of UAS, the national airspace or "experts." So that means either:
1) Dean plagiarized the story from someone else that wrote about this over a year ago; or
2) He is seriously incompetent as a journalist.
I am not sure what is better. Cheating in a game or not even showing up...
p.s. I really hope that law professor was mis quoted and is smarter than that. Otherwise, the Texas justice system is in trouble.
Wow, what poor journalism - i'm a former newspaper editor and this is pure TRASH.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!