Grasshoppers...The Beef of The Future? Not If Drones Have Anything To Say About It!

Written by Andre Louis-Ferdinand

One of the macro problems facing humanity in the 21st century is a looming global food shortage and the resulting political destabilization. This is do largely to changing climate, but mostly to dramatically increasing population. Global population is now 7 billion and will be 10 billion by 2050! Regardless on how fast we respond to our changing climate or growing population, a global food shortage is almost surely to happen and is less than 40 years away. However, don't worry. The U.N. has devised an ingenious solution to this catastrophic problem...eat insects. According to the the U.N. "raising and harvesting insects requires much less land than raising cows, pigs, and sheep. Insects convert food into protein much more efficiently than livestock do—meaning they need less food to produce more product." I don't know about you, but this is NOT an option for me...

"Necessity is the mother of invention." Just as we begin to see global food prices rising, enters the unmanned farm hand. Dr. Fred Davies senior science adviser and Professor of Horticultural Sciences said that "The U.S. agricultural productivity has averaged less than 1.2 percent per year between 1990 and 2007. More efficient technologies...will need to be developed -- and equally important, better ways for applying these technologies locally for farmers -- to address this challenge." Unmanned aircraft with advanced sensors and imaging capabilities are giving farmers new ways to increase yields and reduce crop damage.

These aircraft are equipped with an autopilot using GPS that do all the flying, from auto takeoff to landing. These drones can provide farmers with three types of detailed views. First, seeing a crop from the air can reveal patterns that expose everything from irrigation problems to soil variation and even pest and fungal infestations that aren’t apparent at eye level. Second, airborne cameras can take multispectral images, capturing data from the infrared as well as the visual spectrum, which can be combined to create a view of the crop that highlights differences between healthy and distressed plants in a way that can’t be seen with the naked eye. Finally, a drone can survey a crop every week, every day, or even every hour. Combined to create a time-series animation, that imagery can show changes in the crop, revealing trouble spots or opportunities for better crop management. This allows for precision farming. For example, one area with a pest infestation can be identified using spectral imaging and sprayed for before spreading, greatly reducing the farm's operating cost.

The reality is that drones will be just one part of a multifaceted solution that will include decreasing CO2 emissions, GMOs, etc. However, unmanned aircraft are now clearly part of a trend toward increasingly data-driven agriculture which have been shown to increase crop yield by as much as 15% while decreasing production costs by as much as 25%! So given the choice between a grasshopper burger and an unmanned farmer, which will you chose?

For a short clip of these aircraft in action, click HERE.

UAS (Drone) Insurance...Protect Your Bottom Line

Written by Contributing Writer Desiree Ekstein

With the growing popularity of UAS (aka Drones), it is important to think about insurance. It is particularly important if you are using your drone for business. If you fly as a hobby, the Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA) offers insurance as well as other benefits with their membership.  We recommend joining the AMA because the  programs and benefits they have are great. Both as a professional and as a hobbyist, insurance is something you will want to take serious. First you have to decide what your needs are.

A few questions you want to think about and discuss with an insurance agent:

What is the size of your company? Is it a large company with several high end UAS with sophisticated camera system or are you just starting your business with only one or two drones.

What coverage do you want? Liability only, or full coverage including the UAS and its features. I found most insurance companies will only offer liability insurance. But I did find a few that would cover the equipment if you had the more expensive style of UAS.

Do you need a policy for $500,000 or $1,000,000 limit of liability or more? $500,000 and $1,000,000 seem to be the two most common policy's, however; there are others, and you would want to analyze what fits your business needs and your spending plan. For example, the average cost for coverage for a small business starting with one Drone and $500,000 limit of liability would be approximately $60.00 per month. What I also found is that the premiums will increase dramatically with the quantity of drones insured, limit of liability amount, and if you plan to insure property as well.

Drone Diva Desiree Ekstein

Why do you even need insurance? Nobody wants a catastrophic loss. Insurance will help protect you, your business and other people as well. In our industry this could be caused from user error, product defects or mishap during normal business operations. The risks are high and so is your liability.

Of course... if you are doing commercial work with your UAS, you must have your FAA section 333 exemption, but it is nice to know there are also insurance companies that have been insuring drones long before an exemption was necessary. We did not find a company that would insure "per event." That doesn't mean there isn't a company that will offer it, but our search didn't find any.

If you fly as a professional, insurance is a necessity and there is a level of expectancy. Insurance should be part of your cost of doing business and added to the budget. How much insurance to carry will depend on your business structure and the risk level. Ask a reputable insurance agent what would be the right fit for you. Insurance can provide security for you, your business, and others. We are not trying to sell the insurance, we simply want to express the importance of insurance and the protection it provides. Feel free to comment or contact us if you would like to know more about insurance options and pricing that we found.

"You Can't Take The Sky From Me"...Except Maybe The Sky Over Chicago

Written by Andre Louis-Ferdinand

As many of you have heard, Chicago is now essentially a "No Drone Zone." The co-sponsor of the legislation, Ald. Edward Burke (of the 14th ward) played to the fears of the public by citing, you guessed it, a possible terrorism threat to rationalize this legislation. After passing this legislation he said, “I don’t know what the ability is for these devices to carry a payload, but it would seem that the potential for danger is unlimited." If you are in shock by this statement, you are not alone. After successfully passing this legislation, stating possible terrorism as his reasoning, he said he didn't know the ability of a small UAS to carry a payload. Shouldn't he probably know that and the U.S. government's threat assessment on drones' ability to be used as weapons before he championed legislation against them?

Initially, while looking at this new legislation, we didn't see anything too restrictive beyond the FAA's current AC 91-57A. Chicago's legislation states, "Operators may not fly within 5 miles of the city’s two airports; outside of the operator’s line of site, higher than 400 feet, during bad weather (in the windy city, that eliminates flight for six months of the year unfortunately) or between dusk and dawn." However, here is where the ordnance gets extreme. It states, "that an operator may not fly over any unconsenting person or over any “property the operator does not own.”

This is absolutely asinine! Do manned aircraft fly only over property they own? This would restrict a drone operator to only operating over his/her back yard. After reading this, we immediately contacted the FAA to ascertain if this was even legal. After citing legal precedents, our local FSDO (Flight Standards District Office) convinced us that the FAA has historically sided with additional legislation from large city governments. For example, cities like New York have many rules on helicopter noise and operating altitudes, etc. However, it remains to be seen if Chicago can legally make this a requirement in their ordinance. It has not been directly challenged in a court yet. This legislation essentially makes it illegal for all Section 333 Exemption holders (FAA approved drone companies) to operate within the city of Chicago off of their own property. We anticipate a strong legal challenge in the near future and would wholeheartedly support one as this legislation is illogical.

FAA to Require Hobby Drones to Register...Resistance Is Futile

Written by Andre Louis-Ferdinand

As most of you know, the DOT (Department of Transportation) has assembled a task force to outline UAS (Unmanned Aircraft Systems) regulations to be released in November as the FAA has failed to do so competently. Speaking anonymously about these closed sessions, several members of the task force have revealed that the current proposed plan will require the online registration of all drones weighing more than half a pound. Just for scale, this means any "drone" that weighs more than a roll of quarters. If you haven't guessed, nearly all of the flying kids toys on the shelves at your local toy store weigh more than this.

As of right now, the plan is to have a free registration process that would take place through manufacturer’s websites. Logically, retailers would not be responsible for registering drones at the point of sale. This would have opened a whole other bag of worms. Additionally, having decided, for privacy reasons, to avoid asking for private identifiers, such as a Social Security number, the registration would require only a drone operator’s name and address, enabling the FAA to track a drone that has violated regulations or been lost back to its owner. Also, an e-mail address may be collected if the drone owner wishes to receive updated information about drone regulations or educational initiatives. Finally, drones will also have to display a registration number that is clearly readable and easily accessible.

This comes as a surprise to most, as the industry generally thought hobby drones would not be included in the registration process. While this is annoying and probably pretty asinine in the grand scheme of things, resistance is futile. The DOT and the FAA are determined to enact this regulation. However, how will this be enforced? There is no practical way this can be truly enforced for hobbyist drones as far as we can tell. Especially since, by some estimates, over a million drones will be sold this Christmas alone. The registration task force is rushing to get their recommendations before the FAA by November 20th of this year. The FAA has said that they hope to have this registration system functioning before Christmas. We have to remember, though, that however irritated we are with this proposed regulation, the FAA and the DOT are responding to a perceived threat to commercial manned aircraft.

Destroying Other Peoples' Property Now Legal!

Written by Andre Louis-Ferdinand

As some of you have heard, a judge in Kentucky has dismissed all charges against a man that has shot down a drone. The defendant, William Merideth, said the operator was violating his privacy and spying on his family, even though the drone operator provided evidence to the contrary. Hillview police arrested Merideth for firing his gun within city limits and charged him with wanton endangerment.

One "defense" of Merideth's actions was the claim that the drone was spying on him. We need to realize and remember that the drone operator is not on trial here. Merideth was not changed with "drone murder." He was charged with firing a firearm within city limits and endangerment, but should have also been charged with destruction of property. During Monday's hearing, the drone operator, David Boggs, testified and demonstrated that the flight data showed the drone was flying much higher than Meredith stated. However, Judge Rebecca Ward says that since at least two witnesses could see the drone below the tree line, it was an invasion of privacy regardless of the verifiable evidence.

So what does this mean exactly? Essentially, it is now legal to destroy someone's expensive property simply by saying that you felt that it was "spying" on you regardless of the evidence. What is next? Are we now allowed to shoot our neighbor's Lexus because it has a rear-view backup camera that is possibly spying on you? The judge stated, "He had a right to shoot at this drone, and I'm gonna dismiss this charge." The judge said this even though Boggs presented flight data from the drone showing that it had flown nearly 200 feet above Meredith's property.

To me, this demonstrates the irrational fear of UAS (Unmanned Aircraft Systems) that resides within the general public. Legal systems, quite frankly, are just pandering to it at this point. In no way does this ruling make any sense, nor will it likely stand up in a higher court. David Boggs says he is currently considering his options to take this further and we, here at Digital Aviators, really hope he does and would support his decision to do so. Having physical evidence and proving that the eye witness accounts are incorrect, would work in any other case. The fact that it didn't in this case is suspect to say the very least...