UAS Integration in the NAS via NextGEN and Human Factors Issues

           NextGEN is a new system that is being implemented by the FAA in 2018 that will be an end to end aircraft controller that uses advanced algorithms that optimize not only flight routes, but also ground taxi procedures and possible unmanned aerial system (UAS) integration into national airspace (NAS) (Faa,2016). The system utilizes new hardware at the ATC level as well as new aircraft based systems called ADS-B (Automatic Dependent Surveillance- Broadcast). ADS-B utilizes satellite navigational aids to determine precise data about an aircraft’s position, speed, direction, altitude, and planned route and sends it to a corresponding air traffic controller agency. This information is integrated into a model that contains all aircraft flying in NAS. NextGEN takes all the precise data and uses advanced algorithms to optimize traffic, taxing, and route planning better than any human can (MacNeil, 2015). The communication between the controlling agency and aircraft is also able to provide weather data, traffic data, and important alerts like notice to airmen in the local area. Overall, the system will make the skies safer, increase pilot situational awareness, and save billions in fuel costs and environmental impacts due to efficient routing (FAA, 2016).

            One of the biggest issues facing current FAA policy is related to the integration of UAS into NAS. The current issue is that UASs cannot “see and avoid” according to the regulations set forth by the FAA. Additionally, UASs can lose link, which can cause unpredictable and uncontrolled flight within NAS. These two factors provide major safety hurtles for the integration of UAS into NAS. In order to ameliorate these issues, companies have been working to build airborne sense and avoid systems to increase safety, reduce pilot error, and increase trust amongst both general public and FAA. The DJI Phantom 4 is one of the newest UASs offered by DJI and provides one of the most well integrated and well-designed sense and avoid systems to come standard in any commercial UAS (DJI Inc., 2016). The issue with this system is that is helps keep the UAS clear of obstacles, but it’s not robust enough to provide the type of sense and avoid ability the FAA desires in NAS. NextGEN may provide solution to many off the sense and avoid issues associated with UAS flight due to its ability to monitor, predict, and deconflict flight of all aircraft. Another positive aspect to the use of NextGEN for UAS integration is that it standardizes UAS sense and avoid equipment, and methodologies. One major human factor issue that effects the integration of UASs into NAS has to do with the lack of operator training, certification, and licensing (Al Shibli, 2015). Due to the fact that current regulations have minimal requirements for training and certification, getting the quickly growing population of UAS operators to understand, participate, and coordinate with NextGEN requirements may be the hardest challenge.

            Another complicating factor for UAS integration has to do with lost link situations. If UAS integration does rely on ADS-B and NextGEN integration, there will be three separate possibilities for lost link. The aircraft could lose link with the controlling agency, the aircraft could lose link with the operator, or the controlling agency could lose link with the operator. These three separate scenarios could quickly cause many of the safety parameters offered for NextGEN to quickly disappear. This could be even more problematic when it occurs in busy airspace. Similar to what happens when pilots lose communications, there are many crew coordination steps that need to take place quickly that are not typical in order to account for the emergency situation. If untrained or minimally trained UAS operators experience a lost link, it may be even more dangerous due to their lack of training and standardization. Overall, UAS integration into NAS offers complex problems ranging from pilot training and standardization, to aircraft equipment and capabilities.                  

References

Al Shibli, M. (2015). Towards global unification of UAS standardization: Regulations, systems, airworthiness, aerospace control, operation, crew licensing and training.International Journal of Unmanned Systems Engineering., 3(2), 32-74. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.14323/ijuseng.2015.7

DJI Inc. (2016). Phantom 4 -  DJI's smartest flying camera ever. Retrieved December 06, 2016, from http://www.dji.com/phantom-4

FAA. (2016). Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen). Retrieved December 06, 2016, from https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/aspx

MacNeil, J. (2015, June 3). Air Traffic Services Brief -- Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B). Retrieved December 06, 2016, from https://www.aopa.org/advocacy/advocacy-briefs/air-traffic-services-brief-automatic-dependent-surveillance-broadcast-ads-b  

Unmanned Aerospace Systems Ground Control Station Human Factors Issue

             Ground Control Stations (GCS) come in many different sizes and shapes. The DJI Company, who is one of the largest commercial UAS makers, often relies on smart phones, tablets, and laptop computers to function as GCSs for their most capable UASs (DJI, 2016). Larger UASs that are used by the Military tend to have much more complex and intricate GCSs that provide multiple positions for multiple crew members. The one GCS that stands out due to both its complexity and its uniqueness is the GCS of the MQ-5B Hunter UAS, which was operated by the US Army, and still operated by the Department of Defense. The Hunter’s GCS was officially called the GCS-3000 and was designed and built by Israel Aerospace Industries Ltd (Armytechnology.com. 2016). The unique aspect of this UAS is that it needed to be manually launched and recovered via a separate GCS called the Launch and Recovery Station (LRS). This was a GCS with the same power generation requirements, antenna requirements, and crew requirements as the inflight GCS, but it had a 100 foot cable that connected a hand held remote control that was used by an external operator (EO) to launch and land the aircraft. The EO would need to stand mid field directly adjacent to the runway in order to conduct the launch and recovery which was very dangerous, and caused major delays in airfield operations (Armytechnology.com. 2016).

            When analyzing the functional operation of the GCS-3000, an in-depth analysis of the launch and recovery process and remote control provides a strong example of a system that was designed with minimal though into human factors. The EO would have to stand parallel to the runway and use a small remote that was similar to a model airplane remote to control the aircraft. The aircraft would land and need to catch arresting cables in order to make a safe and secure stop due to the fact that the aircraft did not have a steerable nose wheel (Armytechnology.com, 2016).

              The first major human factor issue was that the pilot could not concentrate on the controls while observing the aircraft at the same time.

Figure 1: External Operators are conducting launch and recovery of the MQ-5B Hunter via the EO Remote. Retrieved from: http://www.northropgrumman.com/Photos/pgM_HU-40005_002.jpg

In figure 1, the EOs are unable to maintain aircraft observation and controller observation at the same time. The controller had a very simple stick style that did not differentiate the different control inputs. This caused many issues due to the fact that EOs could not look down during the launch and recovery sequence.  Without tactile cues to ensure the proper control sticks were being manipulated, the chances of human error due to inadvertent switch manipulations were increased (Cooke, Rowe, Bennett, & Joralmon 2017).

            The second major issues is that during recovery and landing, the EO would observe the aircraft from the front as it was approaching him and then the aircraft would actually pass the EO and the perspective would transition to looking at the rear of the aircraft. The rapid switch in perspective would also cause the EO to have to alter his control inputs. When the aircraft is approaching the EO would use reverse control inputs, but when looking at the rear of the aircraft, normal control inputs would be needed. This quick transition between perspectives at the final moments of landing caused many EOs to either not make it successfully through the EO training, or actually cause mishaps in the operational force (Cooke, Rowe, Bennett, & Joralmon 2017).   

            The two factors mentioned above were both related to the fact that the system needed to be landed manually. From 2012 till today, Northrop Grumman has worked to fully automate the landing process for the MQ-5B (Northrop Grumman, 2016). The transition to more autonomous control and landing is the main mitigating solution to these human factor hurtles. The issue associated with the tactile feel of the remote control does correlate to manned aviation. When pilot workload is high, it’s hard for the pilots to look at every single switch every time it needs to be manipulated. In manned aviation, most cockpits ensure switch placement, shape and size correlate to what the switch does. The best examples of this is that in a cockpit, the landing gear switch is usually round like a wheel and the flaps switch is usually shaped like an airfoil. These tactile expressions of what the switches do help the pilots reduce the probability of inadvertently flipping the wrong switch during high workload situations (DVI Aviation, n.d.).    

References

ArmyTechnology.com. (2016). Hunter RQ-5A / MQ-5B/C UAV. Retrieved November 29, 2016, from http://www.army-technology.com/projects/hunter/

Cooke, N. J., Rowe, L. J., Bennett, W., & Joralmon, D. Q. (2017). Remotely piloted aircraft systems: A human systems integration perspective. Chichester, West Sussex, United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons.

DJI Inc. (2016). Your first stop for DJI drones and camera technologies | DJI Store. Retrieved November 29, 2016, from http://store.dji.com/

DVI Aviation. (n.d.). Aircraft Cockpit Design Experts. Retrieved November 29, 2016, from http://www.dviaviation.com/aircraft-cockpit-design.html

Northrop Grumman. (2016). MQ5B Hunter. Retrieved November 29, 2016, from http://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabilities/MQ5BHunter/Pages/default.aspx

An Analysis of Case Studies as a Teaching Method

Case studies in General:

     Case studies are an excellent method of achieving detailed qualitative research. One of the challenges of online instruction is the lack of labs and lack of hands on experiences. Without being able to conduct hands on research, the use of case studies helps enrich the class experience by utilizing the benefits of hands on research that was conducted by others. In the UNSY track, there are many classes that require design projects, which are a very fun way of spurring research, understanding, and creativity, but there is less of a focus on academic research. For case studies, the focus on peer reviewed and governmental sources provide a very grounded and precise type of research that helps build a depth of knowledge in a particular subject.

Case Studies in Real Life 1:

     As a military officer that is involved in UAS operations, the process of case studies has been the standard in terms of how to execute my mission. A great example is submitting a Certificate of Authorization (COA) for flight operations of MQ-1Cs at Fort Huachuca. Essentially, I used the experiences and written procedures of the training unit located at the same airfield to build and develop my COA. At the time, I was just utilizing the resources at hand, but in reality, I was doing a case study of that unit and its experience in obtaining a COA in order to support my unit’s mission.

Case Studies in Real Life 2:

     As a military aviator we use case studies on an annual basis in order to train on crew coordination. Every year when I am within three months of my birth month I conduct training called Aircrew Coordination Training Enhanced (ACT-E). This is essentially a series of case studies of accidents and mishaps that have occurred in the last few years. Each one of these case studies utilizes crash records and recording devices to recreate the steps leading up to the crash in order to help aircrew see from the outside how the accident occurred. It is sometimes depressing to see case studies where fellow aviators have died, but it’s vital to study these scenarios in order to ensure we don’t make the same mistakes.

Recommendation:

     Case studies are a great method of making students look deep into a topic, but without proper guidance and experience, the case study process can be overwhelming and confusing. While I was going through this course I starting taking RSCH670. This class teaches students how to conduct research and how to format and build a solid paper. The research paper format provided in this class is helpful, but armed with the knowledge of RSCH670, I felt I could have done a better job on my case study. I feel that RSCH670 should be a prerequisite for any class that requires a case study such as this class. 

References: 

Katz, L. (2003, May). Enhancing Army Aircrew Coordination Training. Retrieved November 7, 2016, from http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a415767.pdf   

Request for Proposal - Hurricane Response UAS Design

Mission

The mission for the request for proposal that relates to hurricane damage and insurance claim collection via UAS. After large hurricanes, infrastructure often is limited, damaged to roads and pathways is limited due to fallen trees and power and communications networks are often limited if not completely destroyed.  In order to facilitate quick insurance claims, the ability to gather photographs immediately after the hurricane is vital. Not only with his data help insurance adjusters, but it could also augment a governmental response to the damage by helping predict and plan required resources and support. In order to create a system capable of accomplishing this mission, many parts of the system can come from Commercial Off the Shelf (COTS) products. The majority of the design effort will go into ruggedizing both the air vehicle as well as ground control station in addition to finding ways to power both the air vehicle and ground station without a reliable power source. The entire process from design and testing should take no longer than one year.

Derived Requirements

1.                  Transportability

1.1      Transportation case weight

1.1.1        Transportation case shall be authorized for checked baggage on airline.

1.1.2        Transportation case shall fit in sedan trunk

1.1.3        Transportation case shall be man portable (50LBS or less)

1.2   Transportation case as charger

1.2.1        Transportation case shall serve as charging station for air vehicle.

1.2.2        Transportation case shall serve as charging station for GCS.

1.3      Transportation case ruggedness

1.3.1        Transportation case shall be waterproof per IP68 rating.

1.3.2        Transportation case shall be drop proof from 5 feet.

1.3.3        Transportation case shall be dustproof per IP68 rating.

2.                  Data-link

2.1  Data-link frequency

      2.1.1 Data-link shall not interfere with emergency rescue communications.

      2.1.2 Data-link shall communicate without external network assistance (no LTE).

2.1.3 Data-link shall be resistant to interface from external influence.

2.1.4 Data-link shall be encrypted.

2.2   Data-link distance

      2.2.1 Data-link shall extend to at least 2 miles.

      2.2.2 Data-link shall be line of sight only.

3. Ground Support Equipment

3.1   Power Generation

      3.1.1 Power generation shall be from external generator (gasoline).

      3.1.2 Power generation shall be from 12VDC (car charger).

      3.1.3 Power generation shall be from solar panels.

      3.1.4 Power generation shall be adjustable between gen/vehicle/solar via simple switch.          

3.2   Image processing

      3.2.1 Image processing shall be done off site.

      3.2.2 Image processing shall be transmitted via cellular network

      3.2.3 Image processing shall be transmitted via satellite network

      3.2.4 Image processing shall be transmitted via WIFI

      3.2.5 Image processing shall automatically transmit via lowest cost network available. 

3.3  On-site maintenance

      3.3.1 On-site maintenance package shall support operations for one-week mission

      3.3.2 On-site maintenance package shall fit inside transportation case

      3.3.3 On-site maintenance package shall provide common spares for one-week mission

      3.3.4 On-site maintenance package shall include common tools for one-week mission

Testing Requirements:    

1.                  Transportability

1.2      Transportation case weight

1.2.1        Check complete transportation case with airline common carrier

1.2.2        Place complete transportation case in trunk of typical sedan 

1.2.3        Weight complete transportation case to determine if under 50 pounds.

1.2   Transportation case as charger

1.3.4        Conduct charging operations via transportation case for air vehicle 

1.3.5        Conduct charging operations via transportation case for GCS 

1.4      Transportation case ruggedness

1.4.1        Submerge transportation case in 1 meter of water for 30 minutes then inspect.

1.4.2        Drop transportation case from 5 feet then inspect for damage.

1.4.3        Expose transportation case to dust for 30 minutes then inspect.

2.                  Data-link

2.1  Data-link frequency

      2.1.1 Operate data-link within close proximity of fire department and police department.

      2.1.2 Operate data-link in a location that does not have LTE network.

2.1.3 Operate data-link in a location that is exposed to exposed high voltage powerlines.  

2.1.4 Attempt to intercept and exploit encrypted data-link

2.2   Data-link distance

      2.2.1 Operate data-link past 2 miles and check for signal loss.  

      2.2.2 Operate data-link beyond line of sight and check for signal loss.  

3.         Ground Support Equipment

3.1   Power Generation

      3.1.1 Power system via gasoline generator and attempt a full charge cycle.

      3.1.2 Power system via 12VDV car port and attempt a full charge cycle.

      3.1.3 Power system via solar panels and attempt a full charge cycle.

      3.1.4 Swap power source during charging cycle and check for proper switching.            

3.2   Image processing

      3.2.1 Send data to offsite location for processing.  

      3.2.2 Send data to offsite location for processing via cellular network.  

      3.2.3 Send data to offsite location for processing via satellite network

      3.2.4 Send data to offsite location for processing via WIFI

      3.2.5 While sending data check for proper network swap according to net availability    

3.3  On-site maintenance

      3.3.1 Operate the system for a week with no external maintenance support.

      3.3.2 Pack the maintenance package into transportation case and ensure compliance.  

      3.3.3 Operate the system for a week with no external maintenance part support

      3.3.4 Operate the system for a week with no external maintenance tool support

             

Development Process and Timeline

             The method of development for this system will required multiple teams to work with both uniquely new designs as well as modify COTS components. Due to the fact that most components will not need to be designed from scratch the process should be slightly quicker. The entire timeline of all 5 phases will be approximately 12 months from concept design to production. One of the key processes during all phases of development is the requirement for an overarching systems engineer to ensure system integration is occurring continuously. Ensuring the components are subject to phased testing and validation would assist in ensuring development was both on time and in compliance with requirements through the entire design process (Sadraey, 2010). In regards to the phases of development the will be broken down as follows:

Phase 1: Concept Design- Build conceptual solution to above requirements. (2 month)  

Phase 2: Preliminary Design- Determine what COTS components can be used and integrate and design new and unique components as per the requirements above. (2 months)

Phase 3: Detail Design-Teams design production ready systems that integrate both COTS and non-COTS components and integrate into total system design plan. (3 months)    

Phase 4: Test and Evaluation- Utilize the testing requirements above in order to ensure sub-system integration between teams is conducted to standard.  Selection of test sites and procedures will be accomplished.  (2 month)

Phase 5: Production- Selection of production site, marketing, and distribution will be considered. (3 months)

Testing Strategies: Due to the heavy reliance of both ground support equipment and power generation components, the testing strategies of this system will focus on the integration of all the major components of this system. In order to test the system properly, the key will be finding a location that is representative of a post hurricane disaster area. In order to provide a controlled environment as well as the attributes that are similar to a hurricane effected area, remote sites must be used. The capstone test and evaluation exercise should occur in a location with limited vehicle mobility, limited power resources, limited network connectivity, and for a duration of at least 7 days. The location will not be resupplied of any system parts, tools, or maintenance parts. This exercise will simulate the conditions that this system may meet when deployed to a disaster site, and the duration would simulate the typical time on the ground this system would remain without support from the rear.

Design Rational

            The major themes used to build the design requirements were durability and self-sufficiency. In regards to durability, the aircraft will need to be shipped, flown, driven, or carried in many different vehicles to reach areas effected by hurricanes. In order to protect the system, while at the same time allowing a single person to transport it, a high level of detail was put on the transportation case. In order to reduce weight and complexity, allowing the transportation case to act not only as a protective case, but also a charging stations and physical location of the GCS helped reduce cost and weight while decreasing additional equipment requirements. The transportation box’s resistance to the elements was vital due to the possibility of the system being stored outside if conditions do not allow for climate controlled indoor storage.

The aspect of self-sustainability is vital due to the fact that after a hurricane, the USPS, UPS, FedEx and other shipping options will often be limited due to destruction of infrastructure such as roads, runways, and ports (Cleary, 2016). The need to have all maintenance parts and tools stored in the transportation case will allow the sole operator of the system to deploy forward into the destruction zone without the need to trek back and forth, which would be both logistically difficult and time consuming. The ability of a single operator to gather multiple claims in a period of week while deployed forward will provide insurance companies with a marked advantage over there competition.

The power and network requirements presented also allow for near real time information flow from the destruction zone to a processing center regardless of power and network availability, which would most likely be either degraded or destroyed following a hurricane. The use of satellite networks, solar power or generators helps not only deploy to areas with limited infrastructure, but also allow for continuous operations without the need to return to the rear.

The entire system was designed to support long term self-contained operations in areas with degraded or destroyed infrastructure. The concept of sending out a small package with a single operator will reduce operational costs as well as logistical costs while maximizing the number of claims an insurance company to collect. The system will also decrease the reaction time that traditional insurance companies need to provide proper insurance claim coverage in hurricane affected areas. 

References

Cleary, T. (2016, October 06). What Is a Category 4 Hurricane? 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know. Retrieved October 25, 2016, from http://heavy.com/news/2016/10/what-is-category-4-hurricane-matthew-damage-strength-history-definition-wind-speed-storm-surge-facts-names/

Sadraey, M. (2010). A Systems Engineering Approach to Unmanned Aerial Vehicle ... Retrieved October 25, 2016, from http://enu.kz/repository/2010/AIAA-2010-9302.pdf 

UAS Missions and their Respective Attributes, Challenges, and Legalities

            There are many missions that unmanned aerospace systems (UASs) accomplish in both the public and civil realms. One of the most well suited missions to UAS is aerial Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR). This mission set it not only a military mission, it is also conducted by police, border patrol, and FBI. All agencies that conduct aerial ISR via UAS share many of the same tactics techniques and procedures to accomplish the task. The type, size, and design of the UASs used in this mission vary widely based on where the mission is being conducted, the budget that a particular agency has for the mission, as well as other mission related constraints that are unique to each agency.     

            Three examples of platforms that accomplish the role of aerial ISR are the MQ-1C Gray Eagle which is used by the US Army, the MQ-8 Fire Scout which is used by the US Navy, and the Qube which was used by the Grand Forks, ND Police department to make its first night time arrest aided by a UAS (Koebler, 2014). The MQ-1C is a standard large fuel powered fixed wing UAS designed for launch and recovery via a 5,000ft runway. The Gray Eagle is capable of flying beyond line of sight as well as loitering for over 25 hours. This long loiter time and extended range provide the US Army with a powerful and capable system for aerial ISR (GA-ASI, 2016). 

The MQ-8 Fire Scout is used by the US Navy to conduct aerial ISR, but it is a rotary wing platform which aids in launch and recovery from ships and boats. The system is capable of flight up to 16,000ft as well as can loiter for over 12 hours. While not as capable as the Gray Eagle, the Fire Scout has the huge advantage of vertical takeoff and landing, which is vital when operating at sea (Northrup Grumman Inc., 2016). 

The Qube by AeroVironoment is a small battery powered quadcopter UAS that is utilized by the Grand Forks, ND police department to aid in criminal surveillance, which is the police version of ISR. The Qube is capable of only 40 minutes of flight and has a line of sight range of only 1km, but meets both the mission requirements and budgetary constraints of a small police department (AeroVironment Inc., 2016).

            The mission requirements vary depending on where and when the mission takes place, but there are some major considerations that must be taken in to account when selecting a UAS platform. Most aerial ISR systems need to be able to gain a vantage point that humans cannot typical achieve on foot. This means that they need to be well above the target. For high value targets in Afghanistan it could mean 20,000ft loiter altitude. For a ship or marine target, 10,000ft above the ocean may be the right solution. For a police chase in an urban area, a 400ft altitude could be adequate. The other main mission task that must be executed is relaying the video photography of the target back to the operator in near real time. Regardless of size, platform type, or cost, this function is accomplished at all levels for aerial ISR UASs.

            The major challenges for conducting aerial ISR can be two fold, there are platform based challenges as well as payload based challenges. In terms of platform challenges, achieving beyond line of sight flight is expensive and technologically advanced. The use of third party satellites is expensive as well as complex. Another aspect of flying beyond line of sight domestically is that is regulatory restrictive (Anderson, 2016). One Major benefit of utilizing UASs for aerial ISR is that they can remain in the air longer than most other manned platforms. Compared to systems like the MQ-12 Liberty manned airplane that is flown by the US Air Force, most UASs regardless of size can outlast it while conducting an ISR mission. The MQ-12 can only stay aloft for 6 hours without having to break station to refuel (Airforcetechnology.com, 2016). The MQ-1C can last a full 25 hours on one tank of fuel (GA-ASI, 2016).

            There are multiple legal and moral issues that often are challenging for UAS to be utilized in aerial ISR mission, and even more so when UASs are equipped with munitions such as the hellfire missile. In the case of a military UAS conducting ISR and firing hellfires there is a moral issue as to who is to blame in case of collateral damage cause by improper target identification, or lack of target area situational awareness (McGuire, 2015). There are major legal issues when conducting ISR domestically by the police. The main issue is privacy. Privacy is a huge concern for the American public, and when conducting police action, the use of a UAS could require a warrant depending the state. California is a very conservative state when it comes to UAS use by the police. Recently the state assembly approved a law requiring police to get a warrant to use a UAS to conduct a search (Bailey, 2014). Other states are working through litigation to determine the legality of UAS surveillance by police, but there are many challenges both perceived and actual to utilizing UASs for aerial ISR both domestically and deployed.       

References

AeroVironment Inc. (2016). Visit AeroVironment Inc. Retrieved October 18, 2016, from https://www.avinc.com/uas/view/qube

Anderson, R. (2016, September 24). The opportunities and challenges of flying drones beyond line of sight (BLOS) | Commercial Drones Blog | Aviassist. Retrieved October 18, 2016, from http://www.aviassist.com.au/commercial-drones-blog/opportunities-challenges-flying-drones-beyond-line-sight-blos/

Bailey, R. (2014, August 05). California Assembly Passes Bill Requiring Police to Get a Warrant for Surveillance Drones. Retrieved October 18, 2016, from http://reason.com/blog/2014/08/05/california-assembly-passes-legislation-r

GA-ASI. (2016). Gray Eagle UAS. Retrieved October 18, 2016, from http://www.ga-asi.com/gray-eagle

Koebler, J. (2014, October 2). Police Used a Drone to Chase Down and Arrest Four DUI Suspects in a Cornfield. Retrieved October 18, 2016, from http://motherboard.vice.com/read/police-used-a-drone-to-chase-down-and-arrest-four-dui-suspects-in-a-cornfield

Maguire, L. (2015, September 26). The Ethics of Drone Warfare. Retrieved October 18, 2016, from http://www.philosophytalk.org/community/blog/laura-maguire/2015/09/ethics-drone-warfare

Northrup Grumman Inc. (2016). Fire Scout. Retrieved October 18, 2016, from http://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabilities/FireScout/Pages/default.aspx?utm_source=PrintAd