(representative DIY version shown, not Google's)
"Google’s quest to introduce small unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) into low altitude airspace within a “few years” has driven the company to launch an unexpected foray into the avionics market, says Dave Vos, head of the Internet company’s Project Wing.
Two companies – L-3 Aviation Products and FreeFlight – have recently unveiled automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast (ADS-B) transceivers for general aviation priced under $2,000, hoping to entice aircraft owners to install the mandated precision-locating equipment.
Google’s unmanned aviation venture now plans to beat that price and produce thousands of ultra-low-cost ADS-B Out transceivers for the manned and unmanned aviation market, Vos said 23 March at the Remotely Piloted Aircraft Summit hosted by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).
“We think that – and we are going to do this – we will head-down the trajectory of putting into the marketplace really, really low-cost ADS-B solutions,” Vos told the ICAO audience.
Asked in an interview later if that meant beating the $2,000 threshold, Vos indicated that was possible.
“We have to answer the question: What does the market find palatable in order to really transform? And that’s where we’re going,” Vos says. “Think about it: Would you spend $2,000? We have to make it happen.”
Driving Google’s strategy is a fundamental obstacle to its plan of launching a UAS-based drone delivery service in a few years. Google’s unmanned vehicles need to operate in airspace below 500ft that is currently used by tens of thousands of general aviation aircraft. Some of those aircraft owners have been reluctant to spend money to equip their aircraft with an ADS-B Out system.
Google is also looking deeper at software algorithms for traffic collision avoidance systems, says Vos, a former executive at Rockwell Collins. If Google’s vision is realised, the skies above urban centers could be filled without thousands of ADS-B-equipped UAVs. That could overwhelm current pilot displays showing potential collision threats.
“We think there are some good solutions to make it not so cumbersome,” Vos says.
Those efforts are part of Google’s effort to be “respectful” to manned aircraft using the airspace today, he says. As an internet company, Google is used to fixing software bugs after rolling out new products for customers. That culture had to be changed after Vos arrived at Project Wing, he says.
“Really bad things happen if there is a bug and we didn’t figure it out,” Vos says. “We don’t just get to stop and check under the hood when we’re flying things. I’m super, super-excited to say the team at Project Wing has pretty much done a 180 in only about 3-4 months and really has embraced the [aviation] culture.”
From Flight Global:http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/google-targets-low-cost-ads-b-out-avionics-market-410473/
Comments
transponder for $2,000 is it low cost?
receiver about 20$-100$
or they takl about entire UAV price?
Thanks for the clarification Gary.
I believe that spectrum allocations will likely become a thing of the past in the next decade or so as SDR becomes ubiquitous with all radio technology. RF nodes capable of propagating their own network infrastructure will do away with centralized routing of data which produces exchange bottlenecks. Real time "sense and avoid" is a much better RF strategy for efficient spectrum management. But regulators need something to do to I suppose. ;-)
Overall I'm supporter of the "freedom to exchange information", as a subset of the freedom of speech. Historically RF "regulation" has led to the monopolization of RF for economic purposes, be that TV, mobile phones and radio etc, but in this day and age digital media and information have consolidated into the same data stream that should be allowed "free access" throughout hardware types. In saying that, regulation did also play it's part in RF management, but I don't think the same policies and techniques can or should be translated to SDR technologies. They should also be forced to adapt to allow full exploitation of what the technology can provide.
Regulations should follow technological progress, not restrict them. What RF regulation would exist if Tesla never made radio possible first?
I suppose the comparison of traffic on roads can be made to these types of technology. RF spectrum management is at times, and in some locations, like banning all traffic on a freeway to let one truck through. Conversely SDR lets as much traffic on the highway that it can sustain, by understanding and reacting to the constraints of the highway in real time, just like drivers can. An IP system of the airwaves as such.
At the end of the day we just need to come to terms with the fact that the RF spectrum, like many other naturally occurring resources, need to be managed in such a way as to avoid them being exploited for monetary gain, which in turn stifles innovation and equitable use. Let alone poses risks to our perceived freedoms by warping the value of them.
As such I wasn't as much suggesting to use 4G for just comms, rather that the UAV could supply 4G "for free", to areas that don't have it. Likewise passive radar could be used to not just monitor airwaves for good RF management, but to also identify other unidentified flying objects (yeah I know UFO's again!) using the airspace. Being passiv, they wouldn't add any RF signal to the space they are monitoring. In my opinion command and control should be able to fluently change to whatever link is available at any given time, to avoid third party and other interference in vehicle control.
The group I was suggesting to make was one that made the airwaves as available to everyone, as UAV's has made air flight available to everyone. That way each could benefit from another.
I suppose one can always dream, that the right ideas are adopted. :-)
Regards
JB
Command and control links will all have to be via approved links, some more Google time look for the work of the WRC on the proposed spectrum allocations. 4G and the like are very much off the table for C2.
What I was trying to get at was that all the data links we currently use in the end will have to be approved systems.
Hey Peter
I tried googoolee, even google translate, but I still couldn't figure out what Gary wrote about RPSA C2 has to do with what I said. Command and control protocols and systems are only a portion of what I was suggesting could be done. How about drones not just being able to safely operate, what about they increase the safety of people carrying aircraft, as well as provide the communication and intelligence through a self healing and deployable drone sensor networks?
Martin
I'd say its more important "people planes" know where your UAV is. One could also say knowing where people planes are is a potential security risk that allows them to be targeted, plus what happens if you know that you're on a crash course but can't do anything about it because you have lost control or are too busy making pictures? It needs to be two way. BTW I like my Android RTL SDR too! Crazy what $20 of gear can do nowadays. The tech is there we just need the will to make it.
From Canada:
"As ADS-B does not have the ability to detect non-cooperative aircraft, it is not an approved strategy, in and of itself, for mitigating the UAV sense-and-avoid requirements." (Transport Canada regs)
Not that it won't be a step in the right direction.
George
http://jarus-rpas.org/phocadownloadpap/6_Official-Publications/JARU...
The wonder of Google!
Peter
Sorry Gary I don't quite understand what you mean. Can you rephrase that pls? Thx.
I have that $20 unit and it works darn good. Only large aircraft use the system. What we need is for small planes and heli's to use it and show us where they are.
@mP1 somebody else, UK based. @JB RPAS C2 links will fast become a big issue if its not approved it won't get through.
Um possible and available now for $300 including ADS-B, RTK, passive radar, full duplex comms with telemetry and HD video link, and 4G picocell repeater for self deployed mesh networking. There's a full digital solution (no analog circuitry) in the tubes that will bring it down to around $50. I hope that's what Google is working on. :-)
BTW the RTL2832 on the picture will only receive RF like ADS-B, DVB, FM etc...but can also be used to listen, or spectrum analyse HopeRF based radios etc for $20. Sadly there's no such low cost TX yet though. :-(
What we need is a DIYDrones for UAV comms to get it mainstream. Anyone interested?
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next