UAV Impact blog — Sprint 2 learning and beyond
Help.NGO was pleased to continue the work with Frontier Technologies Hub in completing a modified second sprint of the large Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) IMPACT project. The results of which will organizationally guide us for future testing and importantly, emergency field deployments.
There were admittedly logistical challenges encountered in successfully completing the original pilot aims. The specific operational capacity desired from outset — a UAS airframe capable of swapping between delivery, mapping, and tether (i.e., as a connectivity solution essentially mimicking a cell tower) capabilities — led to an R&D process and customized modifications in coordination with the manufacturer. While this extended the timeframe of the pilot, we believe we successfully procured a very cost-effective airframe equipped with an impressive range of functionality capable of being leveraged in a broad set of humanitarian contexts.
The COVID-19 pandemic of course presented logistical challenges as well. Initial plans slated the airframe to be tested in concert with Help.NGO field and UAS mapping operations in the wake of Hurricane Dorian in Abaco, Bahamas. This would have served as an opportunity not only to build on the initial domestic test but provide actionable information in an international test environment. While ongoing pandemic related travel restrictions made the international test no longer feasible, efforts were shifted towards a domestic test which simulated the flights that would have taken place internationally. These were performed with relative ease.
The domestic test still allowed the airframe to be tested against the mapping capability of smaller drones, showing the extent to which both from a flight time, distance travelled, and lens-width perspective, the airframe far outstripped the capability of smaller drones both from an operational and cost-effectivity perspective.
What have we learnt?
It is one thing to theorize the effectiveness of larger scale UAS operations but another to witness and fly the airframe yourself. Given Help.NGOs experience organizing the complex logistics involved in using smaller, commercially available drones at scale having mapped the entire city of Beira, Mozambique using DJI Mavics & Matrice’s first-hand experience of a large air frame makes you realize very quickly the associated logistical steps — particularly when it comes to data organization, file naming, sharing (not to mention the various operational logistics often needed to fly with small drones like drivers, etc) — that would be easily skipped when using a larger airframe.
Help.NGO also learned key efficiency information both in the collections pipeline by leveraging a larger airframe as well as in the processing end due to less effort and processing required in the collation of disparate datasets via reduction of the number of required aircraft. This will be important to carry forward for future endeavours with time sensitive data collection such as sudden onset emergency response where data decay and the creation of a common operating picture for humanitarian coordinators is critically important.
The other key finding confirmed in this study was the flexibility that larger, higher payload, single rotor aircraft have greater stability and more flexibility in adverse WX and TX conditions. While smaller drones in the field studies post hurricane struggled to perform in high temperature high wind environments especially at higher elevations over complex terrain the larger IMPACT prototype handled weather with little to no impact on handling and data collection/production output. This will be especially important in post storm assessment scenarios where there may be lingering weather effects as well as the reality that frequently complex terrain is present in humanitarian intervention focus areas (due to hazard mapping cliffs, dwellings on mountainsides, and valleys).
How did your project results compare with the existing methods of achieving the same task (cost/ease of use/scalability/suitability for local adoption etc.)?
The project results were much more efficient than current collection methods including manned aircraft, satellite, and ground collection operations. However, the high entry cost of the airframe may present challenges to full localization and a regional or co-op shared equipment approach may be most appropriate. This was also explored via one of the practical training exercise uniting National Disaster Management Agency focal points from Madagascar and Mozambique to share UAS airframes and staff for mapping operations across the two countries and within the southern Africa region.
The initial procurement cost of the IMPACT drone is significantly lower than manned aircraft but exponentially higher than satellite imagery collection. That said, in high volume collections operations the satellite imagery costing (at least 750 Euro per site) would quickly add up and surpass the initial investment requirement from impact after as little as 100 flights. A modality for shared resources or offset costing/loan/lease modality could be explored to stagger that costing to better match the satellite imagery payment schedule.
The ease of use of IMPACT is much better as compared to manned aircraft that have licensing and more airspace restrictions. It is also easier than handling satellite imagery datasets and tasking as it requires the engagement with a third party. The drone, once properly integrated into an operation is as easy as selecting the flight area and launching the mission with faster results than both other modalities.
Scalability may be a barrier due to costing if the focus will be solely on localization, however if the goal is to create regional assets that can quickly augment operations this may be an effective option to expand globally as the net cost will be much lower than alternatives when based regionally and not at the country level.
The IMPACT drone has suitability for humanitarian assistance, disaster recovery, and development operations where high fidelity datasets are required, especially when time is of the essence.
What would you do differently if we had the chance?
We like to think we made the best of a tough logistical situation given the circumstances; however, would have initially expanded the initial domestic test in 2018 beyond payload drop off from different altitudes to do a comparative analysis of mapping capability of the base-line UAS unit used as compared to the modified version arrived at after the R&D process.
The other thing we would have looked to do with the initial project is after quickly ensuring safety, work through the legal/paperwork requirements with FTL and DFID/FCDO to quickly deploy the drone in sudden onset emergencies. During the duration of the pilot we had the opportunity to deploy the aircraft to two sudden onset emergencies but the testing process including clearances and release process that resulted in the aircraft not being deployable in the window of where it would be most value added.
How would you turn your pilot into a deliverable future activity?
The other thing we would have looked to do with the initial project is after quickly ensuring safety, work through the legal/paperwork requirements with FTL and DFID/FCDO to quickly deploy the drone in sudden onset emergencies. During the duration of the pilot we had the opportunity to deploy the aircraft to two sudden onset emergencies but the testing process including clearances and release process that resulted in the aircraft not being deployable in the window of where it would be most value added.
There were admittedly logistical challenges encountered in successfully completing the pilot aims. The specific operational capacity desired from outset — a UAS airframe capable of swapping between delivery, mapping, and tether (i.e., as a connectivity solution essentially mimicking a cell tower) capabilities — led to an R&D process and customized modifications in coordination with the manufacturer. While this extended the timeframe of the pilot, we believe we successfully procured a very cost-effective airframe equipped with an impressive range of functionality capable of being leveraged in a broad set of humanitarian contexts.
What Next?
Because of the pilot our own operational capacity has been drastically increased from an operational standpoint; however, if the pilot as constructed were to be expanded into a subsequent deliverable and now that the asset has been transferred to Help.NGO we would envision the preparation of the aircraft as a rapid mapping package with other partner projects (including a rugged field deployable AWS server for imagery processing) in order for it to effectively integrate into disaster response activities.
Help.NGO would also envision trying to work with other FCDO units such as CHASE or the UN Standby Partner team. The Standby Partner team at FCDO provides UN Standby Partners (such as NORCAP, RedR, NRC, etc.) with funding to deploy Experts on Mission or Service Packages (like satellite connectivity or mapping teams) to United Nations Agencies in need. Help.NGO would envision a situation where we could, with FCDO funding leverage the existing airframe or expand to additional UAS positioned regionally to support humanitarian agencies with rapid mapping needs.
If the above modality were adopted this would result in faster, data driven decisions at the field level in emergencies while also supporting development or monitoring and evaluation operations of longer duration projects.
