ComInspect to inspect multi story buildings using remote control helicopters/cameras.

[pdoane]

Originally Posted by bdoles2

I can see myself flying one of these in downtown Atlanta, slamming into other buildings and breaking the window 12 stories up, and of course it will be a lawyers window.

After watching the videos Brian,... it seems the aircraft hovers (flat and level) when the joy sticks are released or returns to their neutral position,.. sooooooo it is unlike a normal RC plane.

[pdoane]

Of more concern: Federal Aviation Administration of the United States of America and other national and international aviation regulatory agencies may have rules and regulations that limit the flight and use of unmanned aerial vehicles. These rules and regulations may include but are not limited to maximum range and altitude the aircraft can be operated, or may prohibit the use of video or data transmission equipment. The purchaser agrees to become aware of such rules and regulations and to comply with all rules and regulations that may be applicable in their country or state.

[bdoles2]

Originally Posted by pdoane

After watching the videos Brian,... it seems the aircraft hovers (flat and level) when the joy sticks are released or returns to their neutral position,.. sooooooo it is unlike a normal RC plane.

I think my biggest concern would be the abundance of power lines and other safety concerns.

[Timothy M. Ray]

All kidding aside, it seems like a good idea. But, how long is the battery life, does it sense low battery power and land automatically?
I am all for new things, but my 50 year old eyes have not failed me yet. If a client is spending a large amount of money on a large building, I think the cost of a renting some type of equipment to view areas unreachable by ladder is acceptable to include in your fee.
Then there is always liability, and what if's, what if it goes crazy and crashes into someone, or something causing personal or property damage. I would have to check with my insurance carrier prior to even thinking about using this thing.
Again, I am a RC hobbiest who owns and flies a large RC helicopter, and I can say you have to know what you are doing with these things regardless of built in safety features. Every time I take it out to fly, I always learn something new about it and have been doing so for the last 5 years.

[Vern Mitchinson]

As an RC pilot I know from personal experience these things are not easy to fly. Model airplanes are easy to fly compared to helicopters. They can and have killed people. MAAC (Model Aeronautics Association of Canada) http://www.maac.ca rules would forbid you flying in populated areas. As a member of MAAC with your wings you would have insurance provided you fly in areas flying felds sanctioned by MAAC. Most local bylaws also forbid flying Remote Controlled airplance or helicopters anywhere except designated flying fields. You must also used certain radio frequencies licence by the government. A conflict of frquencies will crash your pride and joy.

[Vern Mitchinson]

Go to http://www.maac.ca/docs/2007/maac_safety_code_e.pdf page 6 of 18 for a list of permitted frequencies that can be used for RC. I do not think you will be able to import any Radio that transmits on Frequencies out side these frequencies.

[John T. Horrigan]

Good evening all. A few thoughts to add, if I may.

First, my perspective: I'm a retired Transport Canada Civil Aviation Inspector (similar role to the FAA), having worked helicopters, gyroplanes and aeroplanes. Part of my duties then and now include standards for and incident tracking related to special operations in built up areas.

I spent some time researching this device today, including a discussion with the manufacturer and a company that has been testing the platform extensively for ruggedness and reliability over the past several months, including winter. Here's how it looks to me at first blush:

1) This is not a helicopter, though it is marketed as one. It is really a UAV. The difference is control and stability. There is neither cyclic nor collective control in the traditional sense. Instead there are six coaxial rotors with attitude change effected by power differential.

2) As a result of this setup, the torque, gyroscopic and height-velocity aspects of normal helicopter operations don't arise. The default position is level, unaccelerated flight. It takes an unbalancing of the rotor thrust to move the thing up, down or sideways. I don't consider this a flying exercise as much as moving the platform to position. With one proviso.

3) The proviso: This UAV is stable provided the atmosphere around it is stable. Anyone who has operated near buildings will tell you that updrafts, downdrafts and lateral shears abound. I wouldn't operate a Bell 206 near a rooftop without thinking about the wind effects, and I have a turbine engine, high inertia rotors and hundreds of times the mass of this device. If a gust flips this device inverted, I doubt it would recover.

Can you operate it in the city? I can't speak for the FAA, but in Canada you would be wise to have specific approval, if for no other reason to validate your liability insurance.

Can you operate this without special training? Perhaps. Is it wise? Consider your position if a gust plants this thing upside down on someone. I would strongly advise a training program blessed by the FAA or Transport Canada.

Is this easier to fly than an RC helicopter? In the sense that hands off is stable flight and you have to intervene to destablise it, I would say yes. However, all of the vagaries of RC flying, reversal with direction of flight, frequency issues as described, etc all apply.

Is it a good device? This far into its young service life, it appears to be a pretty rugged unit with line replaceablity of major components, suitable for commercial settings.

Is this a good device for working around buildings? Maybe industrial settings and calm days around others. I would be very wary of operating near exhaust or intakes, windows or anywhere wind eddies are likely. I'd also give consideration to cordoning off the area under the projected flight path, widened to account for a freefall. It might be a good idea to climb above the building well out of the area affected by wind and fly over to view. Beware of loss of signal if you do this so position yourself accordingly.

A question I would pose to those planning to rent out the unit: Have you considered your position if one or more rotors fails in flight and the unit loses control with damaging results? The rental agency would have to prove that the machine left their care in a 100% airworthy state. You may wish to consider establishing an approved maintenance program to keep yourself covered.

For your consideration.

-John

[Russell J. Hensel]

what do these cost?

[James H. Bushart]

John....thanks for spoiling the fantasy.

Now..how about the NACHI submarine that will explore sewer laterals?

[John T. Horrigan]

Fantasy? Under the right circumstances, this platform could be invaluable, not to mention an absolute riot to fly. The devil is in the details.

I think the best application would be overflights of areas like refineries, power substations (if the interference weren't too bad) and applications over large areas that can't be accessed on foot. I also understand there is work ongoing to allow a version that follows a pre-programmed internal GPS map, so loss of signal would not be an issue.

This is technology with a future and my comments aren't intended to critcise it. My sole aim in posting is to get across that, as some others have said, its great capability also introduces risk. So it is with anything that flies.

-John

[Nick Gromicko]

Peter Doane nailed it:

After watching the videos Brian,... it seems the aircraft hovers (flat and level) when the joy sticks are released or returns to their neutral position,.. sooooooo it is unlike a normal RC plane.

Watch http://www.draganfly.com/uav-helicop...os/video-4.php GPS makes this possible.

[Joe Farsetta]

A legitimate question goes to the triggering mechanism of the IR camera. Will the camera snap via remote control, and how will the operator know what he/she is shooting?

Novel idea, but some of the logistics need to be ironed out, including the mounting of the camera, and if the weight of existing camers configurations match the maneuverable payload capacity of the flight unit.

Beyond basic flight control challenges, which may be moot due to the unit's design, comes the command and control of the IR unit.

Liability is the next issue I'd look into. I'd look at two angles; 1) property damage/personal injury... followed by 2) breakage to the helo and payload.

Basic question is whether the benefit outweighs the risk, especially as COMSOP states specifically that no roof access equals no roof inspection.

[John T. Horrigan]

We are considering this unit for a research application to validate its envelope and working conditions in our area. In preparation for the cost/benefit analysis, here is what I learned from the manufacturer:

1) Street price for the platform with Photon 160 camera and all related equipment, is $28K CDN. I would probably elect for the optional Photon 320 due to the distance and altitude. I don't yet have a price for this option.

2) The platform and camera have been tested together and all weight, balance and performance specs have been validated. I don't yet know about performance in rain or other precip. The carbon rotors may be susceptible to abrasion from sand, etc.

3) From what I understand, feed is real time video to a ground station (PC). Images would be captured from the PC. I have asked if a visual camera can be fitted coincident with the IR package.

4) Each rotor is independently powered and the unit remains controllable with 5 rotors turning.

5) Loss of signal equals a vertical descent to landing, which may be undesirable depending on what is under the unit at the time. I have asked if there is a way to program the launch point into the onboard system such that a LOS triggers a return to that coordinate before landing.

6) Intrinsic stability is not the most likely accident causer, but atmospheric instability might be. The maximum vertical or lateral gust without upset hasn't been validated. This would be a key consideration in roof operations.

For your consideration.
-John

[Joe Farsetta]

Excellent answers. Thank you.

[John T. Horrigan]

A couple of links on the regulator's view on unmanned aerial vehicles in Canada and the US. A key element here is that a radio controlled aircraft is considered a 'model aircraft' when flying recreationally, but an 'unmanned aerial vehicle' when being used commercially.

Here is the FAA Link with some Q&As
http://faa.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/faa....i=&p_topview=1

And the Transport Canada link with a brochure:
http://www.tc.gc.ca/civilaviation/ge...chures/uav.htm

Cheers
-John