The Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) have come a long way from the first officially recognized UAS known as the Kettering Bug which was developed in 1918 (Stamp, 2013). The initial use of UAS was primarily by the military and was for dropping bomb payloads on enemy territory compared to today where a UAS is used both for civilian and military use.
While both the military and civilian UAS perform different unique missions, there are some missions that are similar. One mission that is similar to both the military UAS and the civilian UAS is search and rescue mission. A great example of a military UAS used for search and rescue is the Northrop Grumman RQ-4 global hawk which is used to record intelligence, surveillance and reconnaisance data(U.S. Air-force, 2014) and in civilian mission could be used for search and rescue of refugees that are stranded in the Mediterranean sea (Mcnabb, 2015) as well as search and rescue of individuals that have been declared missing.
The strength of the RQ-4 lies in its ability to fly more than 34 hours at a stretch and stay as high as 60000 feet with the operator still able to view high resolution Imagery (U.S. Air-force, 2014) while its weaknesses are mission critical components fail at high rates resulting in poor takeoff reliability, high abort rate, low mission capable rates and a high demand for maintenance support (Reed, 2011).
In order to correct the weakness, the reliability of critical components fitted on the RQ-4 should be improved on and there should be better maintenance support plan for the UAS.
For future cross over/correlated missions/task, it will be in the interest of UAS manufacturers to leave room for the possibility of crossing over of a military UAS to a civilian UAS and vice-versa when they are been developed, hence this will reduce design time and cost of manufacturing a new UAS.
References:
Mcnabb, M (2015, October 5). Military Drones Re purposed for Refugee Rescue
http://dronelife.com/2015/10/05/military-drones-repurposed-for-refugee-rescue/
Reed, J (2011, June 7). The RQ-4 Global Hawk's Continuing Woes
http://www.defensetech.org/2011/06/07/the-rq-4-global-hawks-continuing-woes/
Stamp, J (2013, February 12). WORLD WAR I: 100 YEARS LATER
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/unmanned-drones-have-been-around-since-world-war-i-16055939/?no-ist
U.S.AIRFORCE.(2014, October, 27). RQ-4 Global Hawk
http://www.af.mil/AboutUs/FactSheets/Display/tabid/224/Article/104516/rq-4-global-hawk.aspx
Saturday, March 26, 2016
Saturday, March 12, 2016
Case Analysis Effectiveness
The Case Analysis tool that was used in the Unmanned Aerospace System course was very effective and very easy to understand. The peer review section was very helpful in the correction of mistakes due to typo and insufficient information. It also helped me in improving my case analysis by showing how to explain an important information in a way that is easily understandable to whoever that the case analysis is meant for.
At my present position as an Aircraft Systems Engineer, this Case Analysis tool has helped me to become a better reviewer of different aircraft documents namely Work order, Air worthiness Directives, Task card, Engineering Order, Service Bulletin to name a few. It has actually helped me in properly reading between the line as well as having great input in important documents that might have cost my company a lot in fine from the Federal Aviation Administration due to mistakes.
I also expect this Case Analysis to help me in any future job I have since most aircraft organization and airlines want an engineer who has a great working relationship with a team of different individuals and reaching the desired goal of the organization.
Finally, this process could be improved by making sure that when a Case Analysis is reviewed, the response to the review should be made on the same document and not on a different document like the way we did it in this course. I also believe that there should be direct interaction between the reviewer and the individual that writes the Case Analysis at least once or twice this is because there are some information that are better communicated through speech and not writing.
References:
Reg Austin (2010). Unmanned Aircraft Systems. UAVS Design, Development and Deployment.
At my present position as an Aircraft Systems Engineer, this Case Analysis tool has helped me to become a better reviewer of different aircraft documents namely Work order, Air worthiness Directives, Task card, Engineering Order, Service Bulletin to name a few. It has actually helped me in properly reading between the line as well as having great input in important documents that might have cost my company a lot in fine from the Federal Aviation Administration due to mistakes.
I also expect this Case Analysis to help me in any future job I have since most aircraft organization and airlines want an engineer who has a great working relationship with a team of different individuals and reaching the desired goal of the organization.
Finally, this process could be improved by making sure that when a Case Analysis is reviewed, the response to the review should be made on the same document and not on a different document like the way we did it in this course. I also believe that there should be direct interaction between the reviewer and the individual that writes the Case Analysis at least once or twice this is because there are some information that are better communicated through speech and not writing.
References:
Reg Austin (2010). Unmanned Aircraft Systems. UAVS Design, Development and Deployment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)