Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
#1813485
CloudHound wrote:(yuck)

But informative- it's not all about the vehicle but also the ground station and the link between them.

It's better than "drone" which apart from anything else is inaccurate.
#1813487
aerial wrote:In the future, is it actually proposed that Danger Areas like this will criss cross the country if this trial is a success and the proposal for UAS deliveries within the UK is implemented?


I'd say unlikely - the vision is that eventually, unmanned autonomous aircraft will fly pretty much anywhere to anywhere in Class G. Temporarily, perhaps.

My predicted outcome is a push for low-power, short range EC, on which those unmanned aircraft (and maybe piloted aircraft) will base collision avoidance. I'm pretty sure that will be ADSB-based, because it's a technology the CAA knows about and (guardedly) approves of. Autonomous aircraft developers are likely to develop FLARM-like algorithms, particularly to allow drones to pass close to each other in crowded areas.

All this depends a lot on the CAA's attitude to certified technology, which they are currently very fond of. I think they will have to change.

Integration of UAVs with existing air traffic will, I think, be the biggest challenge - it's a technical, regulatory, sociological and psychological problem, and can't work on the command and control basis the CAA currently uses.
#1813496
profchrisreed wrote:My predicted outcome is a push for low-power, short range EC, on which those unmanned aircraft (and maybe piloted aircraft) will base collision avoidance. I'm pretty sure that will be ADSB-based, because it's a technology the CAA knows about and (guardedly) approves of. Autonomous aircraft developers are likely to develop FLARM-like algorithms, particularly to allow drones to pass close to each other in crowded areas

Indeed. The ACP at Goodwood is for 1st a Temporary Danger Area and then a Temporary TMZ (where some EC might be enough but not defined yet). See https://airspacechange.caa.co.uk/Public ... ea?pID=298
#1813570
When it comes to it, as inevitably it will, it will be interesting to see where in the priority order (balloons, gliders, airships, towing aircraft, powered aircraft) drones in non-segregated airspace are put. Hopefully they will be last in the pecking order, unless commercial pressures dictate otherwise. Although it won’t relieve us recreational pilots from the need to see and avoid, at least I’d feel better that a robot wasn’t above me in the pecking order

D
#1813572
Asimov's Three Laws are as follows:

A robot may not injure a human being or allow a human to come to harm.
A robot must obey orders, unless they conflict with law number one.
A robot must protect its own existence, as long as those actions do not conflict with either the first or second law.
#1813584
Marvin wrote:Asimov's Three Laws are as follows:

A robot may not injure a human being or allow a human to come to harm.
A robot must obey orders, unless they conflict with law number one.
A robot must protect its own existence, as long as those actions do not conflict with either the first or second law.


The zeroth law overrides all of those... but whether our type of GA is seen to benefit humanity is an open question ;)
Stu B liked this