The "drone" is now embedded in the zeitgeist and the connotations are overwhelmingly negative. This lucrative future is threatened by an image problem. Global UAV/drone expenditure is forecast to exceed $US89 billion in the next decade.
And that's not happening.Īerospace manufacturers are banking on the civilian market eclipsing military demand. The pro-lobby wants a smooth, politically trouble-free transition of the technology to civilian skies. It underscores a deep-seated fear by governments and the aerospace industry, both in Australia and the US, over the emotionally-charged connotations of the "drone" label. While literally accurate, those terms have a clumsy, euphemistic feel."īut this debate is about more than just a 'train-spotting' fixation with arcane terminology. been corrected, even upbraided for failing to use terms like unmanned aerial vehicle or unmanned aircraft system (UAS) or remotely piloted vehicle.
Writing a recent Time magazine cover story entitled "Drone Home", on the introduction of the technology in US civilian skies, journalist Lev Grossman observed that he had ". Use the 'D word' in a broadcast or article, and the offending journalist risks a volley of indignant emails and calls from the experts. these aircraft are not unmanned, they are remotely piloted, they are not drones, drones kill people.įor the uninitiated, it's a bewildering alphabet soup of terminology, yet there is one issue that unites regulators, military and industry a strident opposition to the 'D' (drone) word. We need to explain this project as being of benefit to society, not just 'drones kill'. Then there are the sub-categories of FPV (First Person View), where the controller is guided by a live video feed from the craft, MAV (Micro Air Vehicle) for the growing swarm of insect-sized flying bots now being perfected in the science labs, and even MA (Model Aircraft) for the rapidly proliferating band of hobbyists. Other experts call the technology UA (Unmanned Aircraft), RPV (Remotely Piloted Vehicle), ROA (Remotely Operated Aircraft). What started as a UAV, became a UAS, and now RPA/RPAS have been added to the civilian lexicon. International and national civil aviation regulators also can't quite settle on a label.As a Royal Australian Air Force RPA unit commander freshly returned from Afghanistan said last year: "People like to see the word 'pilot' in there." Military pilots hate the drone word because they feel it diminishes their expertise and direct involvement in controlling the craft in the air.Many military forces, including those of the UK, US and Australia, insist on using the terms RPA (Remotely Piloted Aircraft) and RPAS (Remotely Piloted Aircraft System).
#Air force drone definition plus#
Yours for just $350 from the local hobby shop. The "drone" of the 24-hour news cycle invokes images of menacingly-named Predators and Reapers prowling the skies of Afghanistan and Pakistan, launching missile strikes, inflicting indiscriminate civilian casualties, triggering a surge of international anger over the ethics and legality of this new form of warfare.īut the same label also describes a small, flying, camera equipped toy the Parrot AR Drone. What exactly is a drone? It is a deceptively simple question with a highly contentious answer.
0 kommentar(er)
