ROBOTIC AIRCRAFT FOR PUBLIC SAFETY (RAPS)

OVERVIEW

ROBOTIC AIRCRAFT FOR PUBLIC SAFETY (RAPS)

OVERVIEW

Kirk Kloeppel

20 March 2014

UAS or “DRONE”UAS or “DRONE”

2

• RAPS Purpose, Approach, Scope• Test Range• Process

� Manufacturer Participation� Performance Goals� Test Plan� Test Reports

• Schedule, Lessons Learned, Future Outlook • Web Links• Back Up Information

ContentsContents

3

• To evaluate performance and utility of SUAS-sensor combinations using:

• Primary focus: Capability gaps of public, first responder organizations � All levels of government, including DHS operational components, especially

Customs and Border Protection Office of Border Patrol; U.S. Coast Guard; USSS; FEMA; other

– Many other stakeholders/partners: FAA; DOJ/FBI, DJP; DOS/AVC-VTT; DOC/NOAA, NIST; NASA; DOD; DOI/NFS, NPS, USGS; CAL FIRE; other

Purpose/Test Approach Purpose/Test Approach

4

� Key capability measures� One test – ours – applied

uniformly to all systems to be tested

� Realistic operational test scenarios and environments

� Test reports produced for each system tested

• Test categories� Scripted operational scenarios

– Search and rescue (SAR)– Fire/HAZMAT/disaster– Law enforcement (LE)

� Operational utility assessments � Use in National Airspace System (NAS)

RAPS ScopeRAPS Scope

5

Technical scope, requirements� Restricted airspace (COAs are not feasible)

� Fixed- and rotary-winged aircraft, < 25 lb MTOW, and modular, available sensors (already integrated) that address our test objectives

� Day-time flight testing at altitudes < 400 ft (AGL)

• Other research and development activities �RAMPS is a new S&T-USCG Research

and Development Center (RDC) partnership for SUAS Maritime testing

� Technology foraging and field testing – Severe storm modeling and

simulation– Airborne collision avoidance – Counter-spoofing/jamming

�Ongoing support to DHS’s Working Group on Privacy and Civil Rights and Civil Liberties

�U.S. border security demonstration √

�Ultra-quiet SUAS prototype √

Air-based Tech R&DAir-based Tech R&D

6

Border Security BenefitsBorder Security Benefits

77

– 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

Oklahoma Training Center – Unmanned Systems (OTC-US)Location: Elgin, OK, adjacent to Ft. Sill U.S. Army Post and within Ft. Sill restricted airspace

RAPS Test RangeRAPS Test Range

8

OTC-US site (red outline)

“Liberty City” site (urban scenarios)OTC-US is a test facility of the Oklahoma State University’s University Multispectral Laboratory

• We developed 21 SUAS Performance Goals

� Based on notional user scenarios created by senior LE, fire, SAR, and border security operators

� Scenarios were vetted with operational communities

• Our Goals encompass:

Vendor ParticipationVendor Participation

9

� Areas noted: User applications; operational utility; transition to NAS � RAPS PM priority to seek mature SUAS solutions that could support near-term

transition of good (not necessarily the best) capabilities

September 2012 RFI invited manufacturer participation (“Cycle 1”): 72 white papers were received

� White paper screening and selection process: Compliance check vs. RAPS Performance Goals Results: Near-term testing; Later testing; Rejected (non-compliant)

SUAS Performance Goals SUAS Performance Goals

10

Common Requirements: Threshold ObjectiveLost Link Procedures Rally Point Rally Point, after time return to launchAirframe Accumulated Flight Time > 200 hr (rotary); > 500 hr (fixed) > 400 hr (rotary); > 1,000 hr (fixed)Sensors Electro-optical and infrared Chemical/biological/radiologicalSensors (EO/IR) Fixed GimbaledLaser Designation None Laser spotter integratedTraining (operator) One week One dayDeployment Bungee/catapult launch Hand launchedRecovery Line/net capture Deep stall/hoverAssembly < 5 min < 1 minReady to launch (after assembly) < 5 min < 1 minMean time between lost link > 100 hr flight time > 250 hr flight timeAirworthiness–Operator’s Manual Provide written Operator’s Manual Provide written Operator’s Manual Airworthiness–Maintenance Manual Provide written Maintenance Manual Provide written Maintenance Manual Weight (MTO) < 25 pounds < 25 pounds

Rotary-winged UAS: Threshold ObjectiveEndurance 30 min 1 hrRange 0.25 mi 1 miSpeed (dash) 10 mph 30 mphSpeed (endurance) 0 mph 20 mphAltitude 400 ft AGL 1000 ft AGLService Ceiling 6,000 ft MSL 10,000 ft MSLAcoustic signature (400 ft AGL) 70 dBA 40 dBA

Fixed-winged UAS: Threshold ObjectiveEndurance 30 min 2 hrRange 1 mi 3 miSpeed (dash) 20 mph 40 mphSpeed (endurance) 15 mph 30 mphAltitude 400 ft AGL 1000 ft AGLService Ceiling 6,000 ft MSL 10,000 ft MSLAcoustic signature (400 ft AGL) 70 dBA 40 dBA

• Test Plan uses standard methodologies for operational evaluation

� 54 Performance Measures (PMs)� Approved for public release in 2012 � A living document that considers

ongoing consideration of stakeholder suggestions for improvements

• “Cycle 1” is the current test program� Future, “Cycle 2” testing (FY2015+), if

approved, may or will encompass: • Expanded fire, SAR, disaster

response scenarios • Specialized sensor testing • More complex test scenarios

(example: marine, riverine testing)• Airworthiness criteria

Test PlanTest Plan

11

• Operational capabilities � Does SUAS support routine

operations by improving situational awareness?

• Operational utility � Is SUAS easy and efficient to

assemble, launch, operate, recover, and pack up?

� Is video output seen effectively at multiple remote terminals?

• Technology transition � Is FAA authorization

permitting SUAS operation in the NAS likely?

Key Test Factors Key Test Factors

12

• Reports� Created by S&T RAPS team for users � Vendors: (i) Perform fact checks of final

draft; (ii) identify proprietary information; and (iii) clear Executive Summary for public release

� Approved for release by DHS S&T� Posted and archived online

• Websites � Government employees and government-

sponsored stakeholders access the Reports via http://www.firstresponder.gov, the gateway to 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 controlled by S&T and RAPS PM

Test ReportsTest Reports

13

• 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 � 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

Test Reports, cont’dTest Reports, cont’d

14

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

Rating SummariesRating Summaries

15

Above: Sample Rating summary information

Scoring Keys for Qualitative and

Quantitative Ratings

Performance Measure (PM) Unit, Rating (bar-graph), T & O markers Qual., Quant. Rating

RAPS Schedule (Cycle 1) RAPS Schedule (Cycle 1)

16

TestWeek

TestDate Company Platform(s) Fixe

dRota

ry

Report

Online

1Dec. 10-14,

2012 Lockheed Martin ADP Stalker (Blk 15), Stalker XE (Blk 10) √ √

2Jan.14-18,

2013 AeroVironment Puma AE, Raven B, Wasp AE (Blk IV) √ √

3Mar. 11-15,

2013Honeywell T-Hawk (Blk II) √ √

4Apr. 15-19,

2013Leptron

(Tactical Electronics) Avenger; R.A.P.T.R. √ √

5May 13-17,

2013Aeryon Labs Scout V1, SkyRanger √ √

6June 10-14,

2013UAS Dynamics Skylark √

7June 17-21,

2013Lockheed Martin MS2 Desert Hawk III,

Desert Hawk-EER, Indago √ √

8July 15-19,

2013Mission Technology

Systems, LLC Buster √

9 Aug. 26-30,2013

AeroVironment Qube, Shrike √

17

TestWeek

TestDate Company Platform(s) Fixe

dRota

ry

Report

Online

10 Sept. 9-13,2013

AirRobot AR100B, AR100C, AR200 √

11 Oct. 21-25, 2013

Prioria Maverick, VMAV √ √

12 Dec. 9-13, 2013

Falcon UAS Falcon √

13 Jan. 13-17, 2014

Applied Research Assoc. Nighthawk √

14 Jan. 27-31, 2014

AirCover/Lockheed Martin QR425 √

N/A April 14-25, 2014

CBP (PSI Tactical) InstantEye √

15 May 12-16, 2014

UAV Solutions Talon, Allerion, Phoenix30 √

16 May 19-23, 2014

Stark Aerospace BirdEye 400, Mini-Panther √ √

17 June 16-20, 2014

Aurora Skate √

RAPS Schedule (Cycle 1)

• 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

Lessons Learned – To Date Lessons Learned – To Date

18

• 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

Lessons Learned, cont’dLessons Learned, cont’d

19

• 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

• 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 anti-

jamming capabilities– Airworthiness

• Severe storm response pilot – RAMPS new start: Maritime

testing, USCG RDC-led collaboration

– Transition Plan for future funding and management structure

Future OutlookFuture Outlook

20

Cycle 1, FY2012-14 Cycle 2, FY2015-16

RAPS Project Support Officer: – Mr. Kevin Spence: (202) 254-2235

kevin.spence@associates.hq.dhs.gov

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

Project Office, Web LinksProject Office, Web Links

21

• No one platform performs well in all scenarios

• Some fixed winged SUAS may need operating areas > 200 ft radius– Launch and recovery zones– Deep stall landings affected by winds

• Fixed wing aircraft are very good in search and rescue and fire monitoring

• Rotary winged platforms perform well in crime, accident, and arson scene investigation and in police SWAT applications– Hover ability is very beneficial – Some systems are relatively quiet, providing stealth, and can “perch” at

specific locations

• Quiet systems developed by the Department of Defense may need audible augmentation during search and rescue

• Fuel cells provide endurance > 8 hours but require > 12 minutes to warm up prior to launch

LESSONS LEARNEDLESSONS LEARNED

23

• Integrated EO and IR sensors on a gimbaled platform is essential– Search and rescue scenarios are aided by ability to switch between two

modes to validate targets of interest– Dual sensors are valuable in urban scenarios where shadows are prevalent

• Geo-referencing EO and IR full motion video is essential – Needed for chain of custody and target of interest location accuracy

• For some systems, the best way to avoid traffic may be to initiate immediate landing– Climb and descent speeds may not be sufficient to avoid collision

• Rotary winged aircraft are nearing the 30-minute endurance level– Winds are not a limiting factor (fly in winds up to 30 mph)– Can maintain commanded flight profiles

LESSONS LEARNED (cont’d)LESSONS LEARNED (cont’d)

24

25

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

RAPS STEERING GROUP RAPS STEERING GROUP

26

PRIVACYPRIVACY

http://www.gigapixel.com/image/gigapan-canucks-g7.html