TSA plans to shoot down drones near airports – The Washington Post<\/a>).<\/p>\n\n\n\nLet’s just first take that idea right off the table in the\nname of #stupidity. To put live\nordinance over an airport and its surroundings endangers the general public\neven more than the drone itself. The cure should not be worse than the symptom.\nPlus, there are numerous other technologies out there that won’t have the\ngeneral citizenry running for their lives and pilots taking defensive action\nwhen a Stinger missile launches from the airport towards a $1,200 drone that\njust violated the airspace. Even a swarm of drones, descending kamikaze-style\nonto the airfield, shouldn’t be countered with a swarm of bullets and missiles\nbeing fired back at them. After all, what goes up must come down… somewhere.\nThere are better ways of protecting our skies from the drone wars. “Every Battle is Won or Lost Before it\nis Ever Fought,” stated Sun Tzu. In fact, not having to fight is the best\noption of all. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
There are more important issues to consider here.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Drones are no longer an anomaly. They are very much a part\nof the National Airspace System and it’s time we address how their operations\nwill integrate from all perspectives, safety, security, and air traffic\ncontrol. Google’s Wing is the first\ndrone company to be certified as an “air carrier” by the FAA,\nallowing it to launch a package-delivery service in Virginia. The FAA also approved a Part 135\ncertification, usually used by the air charter companies, to give UPS the ability\nto for drones to fly at night and carry cargo heavier than 55 pounds. This is\nonly the beginning of the soon to be drone-filled skies over our world. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Drones represent an emerging tool for airport operators.\nRemote and autonomous controlled snow removal equipment is already being\nimplemented at some airports throughout the world. Several other airports have\ntalked about or even tested the use, of drones for airfield inspections, such\nas the approach light system, and for perimeter intrusion protection. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The solution to integrating drones needs to be addressed\nfrom numerous angles not just one from Homeland Security. This will require a\nteam of individuals including the FAA, TSA, state and local officials, airport\noperators, air traffic controllers, UAV operators, DOD and private industry.\nThe FAA takes a lot of grief for not jumping on the drone issue sooner, but to\ntheir defense, this is an issue that is greater than one agency, and it\ncontinues to evolve and change as more and more companies and public agencies\nfigure out other ways to use drones.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Before we can get everyone together to start working on\nsolutions, we need to decide how to get out of each other’s way.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
On June 18th, at the American Association of Airport\nExecutives (AAAE) annual conference, an FAA official was briefing, by phone\ncall, the Operations, Safety, Planning, Emergency Management Committee. He\ninformed the committee members that the drone issue, collectively, is being\nturned over to the TSA. Further, he stated that TSA is stamping Sensitive\nSecurity Information (SSI) on all sorts of documents related to drone\noperations and drone detection systems making it difficult for other agencies\nto work with them on the issue. I asked several members of TSA leadership about\nthe report, who were also at the conference, and they all said it was the first\nthey’d heard of the policy (but that they would look into it… I guess they\nare still looking as I have not yet heard back).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I was never able to confirm whether the FAA officials’ claim\nwas true (I mean, I was in the room. I heard the claim and then asked a\nquestion to confirm what I’d just heard, so this isn’t hearsay – at least not\nto me). I made a few more inquires then\nlet the issue drop, until now. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
A TSA spokesperson had this to say in answer to the question\nof whether TSA is really going to shoot down drones. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
“The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is\ncommitted to a unified federal response to a persistent disruption of airport\noperations due to an unmanned aircraft system (UAS). In response to the\npotential threat to airports by UAS, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS),\nTSA, the Department of Justice, the Department of Defense, and the Federal\nAviation Administration drafted an interagency Concept of Operations (CONOPS).\nThe CONOPS designates TSA as the lead federal agency for countering unmanned\naircraft systems that pose a persistent disruption of the national airspace, in\nclose coordination with the FAA, other federal partners, the airport authority,\nand local law enforcement. Under the CONOPS, and pursuant to authority in the\nPreventing Emerging Threats Act, federal entities will only seek to mitigate a\nUAS in limited, emergency circumstances in order to ensure the safety and\nsecurity of the national airspace.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There’s an important distinction to be made in that last\nsentence – to ensure the safety and security of national airspace. TSA is\nfocused on security. The FAA is focused on safety, and the airport and aircraft\noperators have to keep their eye on both, while also watching the bottom line.\nLet’s generate solutions that can effectively integrate with what the people in\nthe field are dealing with, instead of on sweeping policies that sound good in\nconcept, but aren’t able to be implemented at the operational level.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The FAA did make some progress this spring when they issued\nchanges to the notification requirements for certain drone operations within 5\nmiles of an airport. The previous requirement was to contact the airport\noperator or the air traffic control tower. It’s hard to find the number of a\ncontrol tower so that leaves drone operators calling the airport operator –\nwhich the FAA provided no guidance to airport operators, whatsoever, about what\nto do with this information. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The FAA has always been in control of the airspace traffic\n(and runways and taxiways at airports with control towers) while the airport\noperator handles what happening on the rest of the ground. Now, Public and\nCivil (i.e. government and commercial or business-related drone operations) can\napply for a waiver from the FAA to operate within the 5-mile radius of an\nairport. Even after the policy change however, reports from airport personnel\nin the field say they are still arguing with some air traffic controllers who\ndon’t want to deal with the issue. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
A solution to the drone issue can be found by modeling some\nexisting solutions in our industry, the FAA’s Runway Safety Action Team, the\nTSA mandated Airport Security Coordinator position, and a National UAV Safety\nand Security Database. We can also look\nto the international community to see how they are handling the issue. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
As with many government programs, the Runway Safety Action\nTeam (RSATs) started when numerous airports began their own programs to reduce\nrunway incursions at their airport. Key airport stakeholders provided input,\ngot together to discuss problems and challenges, and working together, reduced\nthe number of runway incursions at their airports. The key to the RSAT is that\nit was locally built and federally supported. \nEventually, a community of practice started to develop, then the FAA\nissued an Order that mandated their air traffic offices to start the RSAT\nprogram. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The inclusion of industry innovators of drone detection and\ndefense solution providers cannot be overstated. They have already done much of\nthe research necessary to generate effective solutions as has the Department of\nDefense. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Another solution can be found by looking to aviation\nsecurity. In the wake of the downing of PSA Flight 1771 by a disgruntled former\nairline employee and the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, federal legislation\ncreated the Airport Security Coordinator (ASC) position. The ASC is the single\npoint of contact to the TSA (from the airport) and is responsible for drafting\nand implementing the Airport Security Program. For many airports, the ASC role\nwas a collateral duty for someone in the airport operations department but by\nthe mid-90s major airports had created security departments to handle the\naccess control and airport badging process, and ensuring law enforcement\nresponse to security issues. After 9\/11, the role of the ASC expanded\nmassively. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Similarly, airports must create a UAV Coordinator position\nand, depending on the size of the airport and the challenges presented by drone\nactivity in the area, be ready for that position to grow in size to a\ndepartment. Like cybersecurity, the rapid advancement of drone operations and\ntechnology means there will soon need to be even more coordination between\nindependent Droneport Operators, and integrating drones based at commercial\nservice and general aviation airports, not to mention challenges we have yet to\nthink of. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
A UAV Coordinator needs to understand the threats that\ndrones bring to the airport and their benefits. Terrorist groups Hezbollah and\nISIS are already known to have drone capabilities, using them for the\nbattlefield and Improvised Explosive Device surveillance. As drone technology\nis advancing at a rate similar to the computer industry, it will become easier\nand easier for terrorists, criminals, and insurgents to obtain their own,\nlarger and more deadly drone technologies. Not to mention the residual effects\nof all of this electronic data flying around to all these devices which can\ncause radio interference problems and open up opportunities for cyber-attacks.\nWhat happens when a hacker takes over an airport inspection drone, or snow\nplow, and heads it into an airplane on landing? <\/p>\n\n\n\n
All of the collected information on drone detection systems,\ndrone strikes, and other issues should feed into a national database,\nsupplemented by user forums, similar to the way AAAE established user forums to\ncreate more interconnected communities of practices across state and national\nborders. The “UAV Safety and Security Database,” (or whatever you\nwant to call it), should largely be at the For Official Use Only level, and\nonly specific information, after careful consideration, should certain items be\nclassified at the SSI level with an easy-to-use special access approval system.\n<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Internationally, many countries are already taking great strides in the implementation of and the defense against drones. The Warsaw Babice airport in Poland is been connected to DroneRadar UTM. Read \u2018Another airport connected to the Polish UTM via DroneRadar.\u2019 <\/a>Obtaining permission for drone flights in the Northern part of Warsaw (ATZ EPBC) has been simplified, and digitalized. Procedural control, approval, and modification for drone flight activity is done through the DroneRadar system, via two-way, non-verbal communication. <\/p>\n\n\n\nOther cities in countries such as Belgium, Bulgaria,\nGermany, Switzerland, the U.K., China, Japan, South Korea, the UAE, and Mexico\nare also implementing drone approval and mitigation procedures. Even right here\nin the U.S., the FAA awarded a drone services company with approval to fly in\nand around Boston, offering on-demand commercial drone services throughout the\narea. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The key to the drone issues, which will continue to evolve\nand become more challenging, is to establish these practices and procedures\nfirst before it gets too late. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Article courtesy of Leading Edge Strategies, Jeffrey C. Price, owner.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"By Jeffrey C. Price On July 17 of this year, police responded to a drone with fireworks attached to it discovered on top of a building in downtown Los Angeles. Further details have not been released about the incident, but it does represent just one of the many threats drone operations can represent to airports, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":14419,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[127],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-14391","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-unmanned-systems"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/stateaviationjournal.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/FAA-drone-policy-4.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/stateaviationjournal.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14391","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/stateaviationjournal.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/stateaviationjournal.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stateaviationjournal.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stateaviationjournal.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=14391"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/stateaviationjournal.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14391\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":14400,"href":"https:\/\/stateaviationjournal.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14391\/revisions\/14400"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stateaviationjournal.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/14419"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/stateaviationjournal.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=14391"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stateaviationjournal.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=14391"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stateaviationjournal.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=14391"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
![\"\"](\"\/wp-content\/uploads\/JeffPrice-HighResedit.jpg\")