I’m going to introduce this post in relation to the current problems that arise when I say we can’t race drones around the University of Wollongong, or even Australia for that matter and argue some points that I’ve found interesting. It’s to do with current aerospace legislation that has accumulated such negative connotations and speculations with FPV drones that it has put them into the same category as all aircraft in our airspace.
Strategies to avoid this is introducing different altitude limits for both the aircraft’s, which the only risk then with UAVs is the collision within one another, in which case there wouldn’t be any loss of life because they’re not carrying any pilots. Low-altitude restrictions for drones and UAVs however raise privacy issues between the public. If they’re low enough for regulation then the cameras fixed on them “can more easily take pictures that infringe on privacy and can create noise that is an “intrusion upon seclusion?”.
“regulators believe (based on a track record of military drones with somewhat similar systems) that FPV systems do not provide awareness comparable to a pilot within an aircraft.”
This is counter-productive to the drone narratives (speculative, historical – military) and doesn’t allow for expansion of the term…it will only ever be associated with military purposes instead of commercial, consumer etc. DJI have recently released the Phantom 4 that has on-board systems that algorithmically avoid collisions.
(http://makezine.com/2016/03/01/dji-phantom-4-finally-an-obstacle-avoiding-object-tracking-quadcopter/). The sensory measurement isn’t specified so the speculations on what size the object will have to be in order to be detected but, the point is manufacturers are taking the above concerns into account when building them.
- FPV hardware is said to not give individuals the same peripheral sophistication of manned cockpit pilots
- Latency is the problem offering limited awareness to large scale drones
- “Some countries—France, for instance—permit flight beyond the line of sight for very lightweight drones”
- “Regulations concerning beyond line-of-sight flying. One major concern is the reliability of the radio link that connects control systems on the ground with drones… final standards, due to be released in July 2016, ought to provide a solid foundation for regulators to build on” this allows flyers both recreational, non-recreational and academics like myself to draw on the findings for future builds as evidence and purpose for these builds.
Where from here
- “break free of the legacy of manned aircraft regulation. A fresh start would allow regulators both to avoid some of the absurdities that result when applying manned-aircraft regulations to unmanned aircraft”
- European Union Document wrote in the wake of hobbyists and businesses that rely on drones this ““Drones need to be treated as new types of aircraft with proportionate rules based on the risk of each operation.” Which goes back to Japanese innovation.
“Regulators should avoid simply implementing the solutions desired by the unmanned-aviation industry, which will continue to grow rapidly in size and thus in influence in regulatory debates. FPV systems, for instance, are improving. Regulators should have enough discretion to sensibly adopt rules about beyond line of sight flight using FPV systems.”
- Liability is an area which regulation will need to be addressed. It is the commonality link in comparison to the autonomy in drones extends to the driver-less cars has evolved since its first release, but to completely tackle this issue, privacy has to be implemented, which should be on the grounds of, I believe, location and purpose.
Brendan Schulman, former vice president for policy and legal affairs for DJI, states that the FAA may be reversing course on FPV in situations where there is “no threat to full-scale aircraft, such as for a drone race conducted”, say, within a forest or at low altitude over a stadium, as was the case at the Drone Nationals.
John Goldfluss who is a FFA representative spoke on FPV regulation, note that this was clearly stated that it’s not the opinion of the FFA as a whole that the “Drone Nationals (acted) as a test, in which the FAA participated to see whether loosening its stance of FPV might be warranted”
John attended the 2015 FatShark US National Drone Racing Championships despite the grey area of the regulation of FPV goggles and racing in “public” domains. The question still irritates both drone and FPV enthusiasts that if the championships like the one in Hawaii are deemed a regulated and managed area for this kind of activity, the pilots need practise. So an event that draws competitors from over 30 different countries see’s a clear disadvantage to the evolution, performance and globalisation of the sport. Then there’s the people that will never get to the championships in the U.S. that don’t have the opportunity to race locally because the regulation doesn’t allow for it.
If the sport isn’t referred to as FPV racing and more something in the wake of “Freestyle Drone Course” the Australian authorities don’t seem to have as big of a problem. The goggles can be linked to RC (remote control) themed events. The idea of my game dossier is to bring into reality and interest of UOW and local areas for those who are interested in channelling a more adrenilne filled expertise in drone flight, to that of a pod racer in Starwars episode 1.
Kakaes K Greenwood F Lippincott M Dosemagen S Meier P Wich S, 2015, Drones and Aerial Observation: New Technologies for Property rights, Human Rights and Global Development, New America, viewed 19th April 2016, <http://www.iapad.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/DronesAndAerialObservation.pdf#page=29>
Schneider, D 2015, ‘Is U.S drone racing legal? Maaaaybe’, IEEE Spectrum, vol. 52, no. 11, pp. 19-20, viewed 7th April 2016, <http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=7335890>
My DIGC330 digital artefact that’s an auto-ethnographic response to regulation and policy in the Asian-pacific region had the potential to investigate a number of possibilities and reasons why these certain laws were in place.
Click here or the above picture to view my research!
Auto-Ethnographic Research: Production, Consumption and Representation of Drones in China and the Asian-Pacific Response
An auto ethnographic response to regulation and policy in the Asian-pacific region had the potential to investigate a number of possibilities and reasons why these certain laws were in place. So this is how I decided to structure my project initially and accumulate a number of statistics and expertise in the area of Drone flying within Australia and overseas to accumulate the idea of a “responsible pilot”. Consistent of this approach to research, I found myself exploring and researching into something completely different, in the Chinese position globally with drones and UAVs (un-manned aerial vehicles) and the Asian-Pacific response. This idea of the use of narrative in conducting a research train of thought worked for me as I could draw from personal experience in drone technology, and collect information that’s happening now in terms of production, consumption and representation of drones in China. I purchased a Parrot A.R Drone 2.0 to fly and video various elements of agriculture and examine the way it can improve productivity and investigate the all-round usefulness of the technology for farmers. Whilst I learnt the controls, I couldn’t help but notice the (mostly Chinese) international students gathering around and looking out the window of the spectacle. This influenced me in a development of my investigation to focus on China, still taking into account surrounding countries and their stance on the new platform.
I got my own basic pamphlet within the box detailing the rules here in Australia to which I’d like to contrast with that in China and Japan particularly and then explore why this could be the case. Current Australian Regulation according to UAV international looks like this:
General Australian Drone Laws:
You may NOT fly your drone closer than 30 meters to vehicles, boats or buildings that are on private property or you must have explicit permission from the private property owner.
You may NOT fly your drone over populated areas such as beaches, other people’s backyards, heavily populated parks or sports areas where games are currently in session.
You may NOT operate your drone within 5.5 Km radius of any aerodrome, airfield, airport, seaplane taking off or landing, or helicopter landing sites located at hospitals, police stations or other locations. It is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to be aware of your surroundings and ignorance is no defence.
You may ONLY operate your drone during daylight.
You MUST ONLY operate your drone in good weather conditions and maintain visual contact with your UAV at all times.
You may NOT fly your drone above 400 feet (123 meters).
UAV must NOT drop or discharge an object from your drone that poses a risk to another aircraft, persons or property.
Approval is required for operation of a drone weighing 150 Kilograms (fixed wing) or 100 Kilograms (rotary wing).
A drone must NOT be operated within 30 meters of a person not directly associated with the operation of that UAV.
You may NOT operate a drone using FPV equipment.
Regulation in regards to the use of drones in Asia varies from country to country, from completely outlawed to slowly adapting the popularity and changing aerospace laws to suit consumer needs.
China are currently reviewing extensively their drone regulations and have a general set of policies in place to cover basic drone flying in accordance with the CAAC (Civil Aviation Administration of China). They are as follows according to UAV Systems International:
General China Drone Laws:
Drone Less than 7Kg? OK for Operation
Drone 7Kg – 116Kg? Licence from CAAC required
>116Kg? Pilots licence and UAV certification required for operation
Drone flights in controlled areas require approval in advance
Approval from CAAC is needed for all commercial drone flights
Japan being the innovative technological country I’ve come to know and love, I assumed it would lead the way in its regulation to try and emerge this technology. It did take off in its beginning in the country with legislation giving it every opportunity to be prevalent in the country, quickly. However, a drone carrying radioactive substances landed on government building with the prime minister located inside, and since the policies have become increasingly stronger as It is now illegal to fly drones in public parks. Thus, according to UAV systems international
General Japan Drone Laws:
You must fly your drone below 150 meters
You must fly your drone at least 9Km away from airports
You must not fly your drone over crowds
You must stay away from all power lines
In accordance with the road transport law you are not allowed to fly your drone over any roads
In accordance with the land property law you are not allowed to fly over any property without permission from the owner
Osaka has banned drone use in all parks within the city limits
I also researched and uncovered laws in Korea, Singapore and Thailand and speculated their relationships and similarities in relation to Australia, Japan and China.
I closely examined China’s drone development as a nation and one way this was made possible, in conjunction with the Ellis reading, investigating to “forms of representation that deepen our capacity to empathise with people who are different from us”, thus I studied, and at times struggled with, the language and cultural expressions of Asian countries.
The following is the expression of each country and the associate verb or noun that comes with the English term “drone”
Japaneseドローン – growl, groan, roar, snarl, moan, drone
Chinese 無人駕駛飛機 – hiss, neigh, hissing, fizzing, buzz, drone
Korean – 무인 비행기
mu-in bihaeng-gi – buzz and buzz, hum, boom
Indonesian – dengung -rumble, thunder, propaganda
This details fears and anxieties perhaps explained in the way the expression drone is culturally constructed with an unknown element and a restricted control sector for particular countries. All these words displayed negative connotations and were associated with almost scary meanings when paired with the English equivalent to the expression drone.
China being perhaps the most lenient in their policy of flying in comparison to other Asian continents has implemented drone technology into their military capabilities and has seen tremendous success. It has successfully flown their first 20 minute stealth drone, Lijian, as a part of their innovative advancements. Authorities have suggested that the technology can strengthen intelligence gathering techniques on their neighbouring countries. It is powered by a single jet engine and is the result of a partnership between Chinese aerospace firms Shenyang Aviation and Hongdu Aviation Industry. Lijian, which means “sharp sword” in Putonghua again comes back to a hostile and potentially dangerous connotation when thinking about it to the citizens of the population, and thus it’s surrounding countries.
A Chinese company has been predicted to control over half the UAV manufacturing industry over the next 10 years according to studies in the Forecast International. The report predicts that the global drone market will more than double in the next ten years, rising from $942 million in 2014 to an annual $2.3 billion in 2023. The reasoning behind the market increased hasn’t been linked to increase in production, more the increase in cost of the technology.
“The report forecasts that the Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC), a state-owned Chinese defence company, will lead the world in UAV production. According to Forecast International, AVIC will produce about $5.76 billion worth of UAVs through 2023. This is more than half of the UAVs by value that will be produced during this time period. Nearly all these will be sold to Chinese consumers.”(The Diplomat, 2014)
In terms of commercial drones flown by citizens, China’s DJI brand of drones are a top choice of entrepreneurs and enthusiasts worldwide, particularly in the U.S in areas such as cinematography, agriculture, construction and surveillance. Mr Wang’s DJI creation is a new breed of Chinese company. China became an economic juggernaut by in large part manufacturing cheap goods for companies from other countries. In recent years, a handful of Chinese firms, including Huawei Technologies Co., Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. (which is an online trade business) and Lenovo Group Ltd (electronics)., have evolved from imitators to global leaders in their sectors. DJI has taken that further by creating a product that is, in many ways, the first of its kind. At a time when most drones were assembled from kits by enthusiasts, it developed systems that stabilized both the aircraft and its camera, and packaged them into an inexpensive device ready to fly out of the box. This information sparked personal epiphany when I was conducting my research in rural New South Wales, with people showing interest in a project that started as an idea. Australia is still figuring out the drone’s potential and my plans to introduce the technology further into Australia especially in these places where it’s virtually unknown.
Tensions have been brewing in the wake that China is well known to have plans for its military drones (UAVs) to conduct missions that are of less importance and more ‘test’ missions for] example it has been reported that Beijing had considered conducting a drone strike somewhere in the Golden Triangle to eliminate a Myanmar drug dealer who was wanted in China. Although around the same time of year, Japan was celebrating its nationalisation of the islands of Senkaku when authorities detected a labelled unidentified UAV which interfered with their aircraft, flying around the islands. Initially China didn’t claim it, however came around to say it belonged to them and that it had been on a routine mission around the area. In response, Japanese authorities have been reported on intending to shoot down any instances of UAV activity entering its airspace. China returned by saying it would consider this an act of war. Very interesting to consider when China is leading the way with their military UAVs being produced to a global market, and Japans need for the technology.
Zachary Keck 2014, China to Lead World in Drone Production, The Diplomat, viewed 24th September 2015, <http://thediplomat.com/2014/05/china-to-lead-world-in-drone-production/>
Arthur Herman 2014, Japans Coming Drone Revolution, Hudson Institute, viewed 24th September 2015, <http://www.hudson.org/research/10685-japan-s-coming-drone-revolution>
Jack Nicas 2014, Who Builds The World’s Most Popular Drones, The Wall Street Journal, viewed 24th September 2015, <http://www.wsj.com/articles/who-builds-the-worlds-most-popular-drones-1415645659>
Coco Feng 2015, Evolution of the species: world’s largest drone producer DJI plots open platform as China eyes customised drones, South China Morning Post, viewed 24th September 2015, < http://www.scmp.com/tech/social-gadgets/article/1845562/evolution-species-worlds-largest-drone-producer-dji-plots-open>
He Huifeng 2015, China restricts exports of ‘high performance’ drones as national security fears heighte, South China Morning Post, viewed 21st September 2015, <http://www.scmp.com/tech/enterprises/article/1845754/china-restricts-exports-military-drones-national-security-fears>
DroneInfo 2015, The Current state of Global Drone Regulations: Drone regulations across the globe are rapidly evolving, we are working to stay on top of them, The Drone Info, viewed 23rd September 2015, <http://www.thedroneinfo.com/the-current-state-of-global-drone-regulations/>
UAV Systems International year unknown, Drone Laws by Country, UAV Systems International, viewed 20th September 2015, <https://uavsystemsinternational.com/>
Christopher Harress 2014, The Rise Of China’s Drone Fleet And Why It May Lead To Increased Tension In Asia, International Business Times, viewed 24th September 2015, <http://www.ibtimes.com/rise-chinas-drone-fleet-why-it-may-lead-increased-tension-asia-1535718>
Google 2015, Google Translate (available online), viewed 25th September 2015, <https://www.google.com.au/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=google+translate>
Ellis, L, Adams T.E, Bochner A.P 2011, ‘History of Auto-ethnography’, Auto-ethnography: An Overview, vol.12, no.1, viewed 24th September 2015,< http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1589/3095#g1>
Perhaps a consideration and a point to come back to this week is how do Asian countries and cultures express the word ‘drone’ or ‘quadcopter’. The idea of something in aerospace could have negative connotations in terms of surveillance and control. The Chinese media is heavily mediated and with my own experiences in previous subjects, I’ve learnt how social media platforms have been completely outlawed and replaced by another from the government.
This led me into thinking about Asian anxieties and perhaps the link between technological advancement with drones. Currently I’ve been using a Parrot A.R drone to record footage of agricultural landscapes and using its surveillance potential to the benefit of farmers. This is done with little human activity around and next to no obstacles to be of concern. In these conditions the use of aerospace isn’t fearful to citizens, however I believe in a place such as China, we’re the population is dense, and some drones have an intimidating effect.
China being perhaps the most lenient in their policy of flying in comparison to other Asian continents has implemented drone technology into their military capabilities and has seen tremendous success. It has successfully flown their first 20 minute stealth drone, Lijian, as a part of their innovative advancements. Authorities have suggested that the technology can strengthen intelligence gathering techniques on their neighbouring countries.
In comparison to the laws that stand in place with quadcopters in China, which are mostly encouraging of novelty use, however the countries stability has become a subject of question with its sheltered control policies. Perhaps the mindset of the civilians in relation to the drone technology available is reflected in their policies and regulations
New regulation as of the 1st of July has seen drones made in China that have a 300km flight radius and a 20 litre capacity is limited in their exportation overseas. The Chinese authorities didn’t actually comment on their fears of national security, instead the ban was seen as more keeping specific technologies out of the wrong hands.