Revising the Airspace Model for commercial drone integration
This paper is also containing superior solution exitisng Amazon's patent applications (even if those are also often based on prior art, please contact me to complete a list).
The paper also contains discussion on practical aspects of ground avoidance in US airspace.
Comments
@Robert Palmer, having photomapping background, I was thinking the idea of delivery drones was a marketing noise. But the more I was thinking about application and documenting why it is harming existing drone industry, the more reasons I found to believe this can be made safe. My paper being a rant on patent minefield policies, is also pinpointing current issues with airspace management in general, how they handle obstacles, how they think you can make photomapping restricted to very low altitudes etc. The real moment when I have understood something realistic can be made is when I have realized that nobody really knows what ground level is, therefore many people flying with all possible aircraft 'by eye', and by extrapolating industry 20 years ahead using wild guess of number of US passengers, just to see the concentration will be still negligible compared to birds. I am supporting feasibility of very light delivery drones, even now, as they are seemingly 'dumb' according to marketing point of view of big companies, arguing that lighter is better, sensors are hard crash points and what can be done must be done anyway as boundary between G & E class airspaces is an illusion. What new large companies do is:
a. they realize they are late
b. they realize they never did serious research on the subject before
c. they must put reset switch creating patent minefield, dismissing current solutions then hoping all competitors to die out before really pushing on.
What must to be done is:
a. pinpoint false thinking
b. defuse patent minefields
c. dismiss unfeasible 'can avoid all by myself' technologies.
I believe delivery drones are marginally feasible even with current technology and I have put a lot of effort to make them work along with photogrammetric drones. I believe delivery drones can be made, but what is happening at company level are most often ill-devised, overweight inefficient dog-chopping monsters derived from smaller toys that are being made even more unreliable and fearsome with addition of layers of very complex, not available commercially control systems.
If If anybody has problems downloading, please PM me. I would like to host elsewhere to make it easier to access. this is a public document.
@Marc Dornan Thank you I will rearrange things before NewYear after a feedback is seen and will make short digest in a few weeks. The issue with prior art is known on this forum, it is enough to send the paper the document to USPO as prior art request instead of chatting with people, they are obligated to make cleanup. I think your logging issue is related to the fact google lives on cookies, every time you click any of the documents it wants you to log in as they like to get you logged in for all activities. If anybody is phishing, it's is PRISM. This document has very special purpose: this is a multiuse thing, patent defuser, prior art documenter, eye opener for amazon management board, a rant of completely disillusioned overeducated regular worker, a hones aid for US people to revise their policies around drones as proposed from the outside world, maybe even research inspiration for some etc. This is why it is a big thing by volume. At this moment, if you want short, understandable and completely imbalanced commercially, unjustified technically and socially irresponsible solution, go for original Amazon Prime Air proposal. If I had it arranged similarly, we would have yet another 4-page proposal with some random image - without real point for technical and law-oriented discussion. Therefore big thing first, targeted introductions later.
I'm assuming the first comment, suggesting a phishing attempt was a joke and a misunderstanding of what phishing is... I was able to view the linked PDF without logging in at all so no username/password to steal.
I did skim through the document but lost interest very quickly. To be fair, I do not support any form of drone delivery platform and think they are a very bad idea. I do support commercial applications but not those involving autonomous flight over a densely populated area. A failure in these stupid applications is only likely to cause more damage to my RC hobby.
Hey Marc.
I think you'd better get back in line (at the shop and down the nearest religious outlet) and conform to the cultural inertia as subjects of our capitalist overloads. Ahem... I mean finally get your Christmas shopping done. Your country's economy needs you! :-D (and your servitude!)
Now if only those darn Mavics were in stock in AUS.... ;-)
@Krzysztof Bosak You need to make the doc public. That way people do not need to log in - I would never log in to see a doc. Too many phishing scams do the same thing. Just an FYI.
Why not revise your post, or re-post with a summary of your points in the main post. You will get a lot more attention as few people will read 53 pages. It would take little convincing that Amazon is taking all sorts of existing ideas and trying to patent. They are not merely content to get rid of any properly paid retail or distribution logistics jobs. I would write more but I have to get my last minute Christmas shopping done with Amazon Prime!
"to slag off your employer publicly"
As stated in the document:
-4usd/hour is not an employer for theoretical physicists that did drone research 8 years before their Prime Air team
-they are no longer my employer
-they did not even bothered to revise my CV for Prime Air for 9 months
-they are creating patent minefields based on prior art, making workign for another employer int this sector more difficult
-their proposal for airspace is hurting photogrammetric drone operations
If they don't listen - I am free to share better design.
Well, looks like they are already beta testing in the UK.
https://www.amazon.com/b?node=8037720011
Interesting approach, to slag off your employer publicly. Good luck.
No, it's a 53 page PDF of a white paper criticizing the Amazon airspace proposal (and griping about how much people who write patent applications are paid). It looks quite thorough, though I don't have time to actually read something that long.
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next