ROBOTIC AIRCRAFT FOR PUBLIC SAFETY (RAPS) OVERVIEW

1. ROBOTIC AIRCRAFT FOR PUBLIC SAFETY (RAPS) OVERVIEW Kirk Kloeppel 20 March 2014

2. UAS or “DRONE”

3. Contents • RAPS Purpose, Approach, Scope • Test Range • Process • Manufacturer Participation • Performance Goals • Test Plan • Test Reports • Schedule, Lessons Learned, Future Outlook • Web Links • Back Up Information

4. Purpose/Test Approach • To evaluate performance and utility of SUAS-sensor combinations using: • Primary focus: Capability gaps of public, first responder organizations • All levels of government, including DHS operational components, especially Customs and Border Protection Office of Border Patrol; U.S. Coast Guard; USSS; FEMA; other • Many other stakeholders/partners: FAA; DOJ/FBI, DJP; DOS/AVC-VTT; DOC/NOAA, NIST; NASA; DOD; DOI/NFS, NPS, USGS; CAL FIRE; other • Key capability measures • One test – ours – applied uniformly to all systems to be tested • Realistic operational test scenarios and environments • Test reports produced for each system tested

5. RAPS Scope • Test categories • Scripted operational scenarios • Search and rescue (SAR) • Fire/HAZMAT/disaster • Law enforcement (LE) • Operational utility assessments • Use in National Airspace System (NAS) • Technical scope, requirements • Restricted airspace (COAs are not feasible) • Fixed- and rotary-winged aircraft, < 25 lb MTOW, and modular, available sensors (already integrated) that address our test objectives • Day-time flight testing at altitudes < 400 ft (AGL)

6. Air-based Tech R&D • Other research and development activities • RAMPS is a new S&T-USCG Research and Development Center (RDC) partnership for SUAS Maritime testing • Technology foraging and field testing • Severe storm modeling and simulation • Airborne collision avoidance • Counter-spoofing/jamming • Ongoing support to DHS’s Working Group on Privacy and Civil Rights and Civil Liberties • U.S. border security demonstration √ • Ultra-quiet SUAS prototype √

7. Border Security Benefits • Rapid response • Improved situational awareness and agent safety • High-value assets in remote, inaccessible, dangerous AORs • Relatively low unit costs could provide • Many more air assets for target identification and tracking • Eventually, complete aerial coverage of the U.S. border 7

8. RAPS Test Range Oklahoma Training Center – Unmanned Systems (OTC-US) Location: Elgin, OK, adjacent to Ft. Sill U.S. Army Post and within Ft. Sill restricted airspace OTC-US site (red outline) OTC-US is a test facility of the Oklahoma State University’s University Multispectral Laboratory “Liberty City” site (urban scenarios)

9. Vendor Participation • We developed 21 SUAS Performance Goals • Based on notional user scenarios created by senior LE, fire, SAR, and border security operators • Scenarios were vetted with operational communities • Our Goals encompass: • Areas noted: User applications; operational utility; transition to NAS • RAPS PM priority to seek mature SUAS solutions that could support near-term transition of good (not necessarily the best) capabilities • September 2012 RFI invited manufacturer participation (“Cycle 1”): 72 white papers were received • White paper screening and selection process: • Compliance check vs. RAPS Performance Goals • Results: Near-term testing; Later testing; Rejected (non-compliant)

10. SUAS Performance Goals

11. Test Plan • Test Plan uses standard methodologies for operational evaluation • 54 Performance Measures (PMs) • Approved for public release in 2012 • A living document that considers ongoing consideration of stakeholder suggestions for improvements • “Cycle 1” is the current test program • Future, “Cycle 2” testing (FY2015+), if approved, may or will encompass: • Expanded fire, SAR, disaster response scenarios • Specialized sensor testing • More complex test scenarios (example: marine, riverine testing) • Airworthiness criteria

12. Key Test Factors • Operational capabilities • Does SUAS support routine operations by improving situational awareness? • Operational utility • Is SUAS easy and efficient to assemble, launch, operate, recover, and pack up? • Is video output seen effectively at multiple remote terminals? • Technology transition • Is FAA authorization permitting SUAS operation in the NAS likely?

13. Test Reports • Reports • Created by S&T RAPS team for users • Vendors: (i) Perform fact checks of final draft; (ii) identify proprietary information; and (iii) clear Executive Summary for public release • Approved for release by DHS S&T • Posted and archived online • Websites • Government employees and government-sponsored stakeholders access the Reports via http://www.firstresponder.gov, the gateway to S&T’s First Responder Communities of Practicesite, https://communities.firstresponder.gov,which is the gateway to the RAPS Community of Practicesite. • Access controlled by S&T and RAPS PM­

14. Test Reports, cont’d • Test Reports • Content: Complete test results, including scoring summary tables; general SUAS information; company-proprietary cost and other information • Audience: Restricted to government employees and government-sponsored stakeholders interested in RAPS (potential users) • Access to Test Reports: • Available upon request to RAPS Program Manager • Available online at Robotic Aircraft for Public Safety (RAPS) SecureCommunity of Practice website • Executive Summaries of Test Reports • Content: Highlights of test results • Audience: Approved for public release (goal: to reach a wide readership) • Access to Executive Summaries: • Available upon request to RAPS Program Manager • Available online at Robotic Aircraft for Public Safety (RAPS)Community of Practice website

15. Rating Summaries To facilitate SUAS comparisons, each Report contains Rating Summaries of results in our 54 Performance Measures in 5 Assessment categories: A1. Law Enforcement; A2. Search and Rescue; A3. Fire Response; A4. Operational Utility; A5. Operation in NAS Above: Sample Rating summary information Performance Measure (PM) Unit, Rating (bar-graph), T & O markers Qual., Quant. Rating Scoring Keys for Qualitative and Quantitative Ratings

16. RAPS Schedule (Cycle 1)

17. RAPS Schedule (Cycle 1)

18. Lessons Learned – To Date • No one platform performs well in all scenarios • Fixed-wing aircraft: • Very good in search and rescue (SAR), fire monitoring • Some fixed wing SUAS need operating areas > 200 ft radius • Launch and recovery zones • Deep stall landings affected by winds • Rotary-winged aircraft: • Perform well in crime, accident, and arson scene investigation, and in SWAT • Hover ability is very beneficial • Some systems are relatively quiet, providing stealth, and can “perch” • Up to 50-min endurance was tested/verified – winds are not a limiting factor (flying in winds up to 30 mph) • In winds, maintain commanded flight profiles better than fixed wing aircraft

19. Lessons Learned, cont’d • Essential capabilities for effective, high-use operations: • Integrated EO and IR sensors on a stabilized, gimbaled platform • SAR aided by ability to switch between two modes to validate Targets of Interest (TOI) • Dual sensors are valuable in urban scenarios where shadows are prevalent • Geo-referenced EO and IR full motion video • Needed for chain of custody and TOI location accuracy • Collision avoidance: • For some systems, the best way to avoid oncoming traffic may be to initiate immediate landing – but climb and descend speeds may not be sufficient to avoid collision • Other findings: • Quiet systems developed by DOD may need audible augmentation during SAR • The fuel cell SUASwe tested is a significant new capability: > 8 hr endurance • Note to potential users: It requires > 12 min for warm-up prior to launch

20. Future Outlook • 2012 • Range selection; advocacy • Define program scope and set key partnerships • RFI; Test Plan; contracting • Stand up: • Processes to work with manufacturers, create and disseminate reports • Liaison to DHS privacy working group • Conduct 19 flight test weeks • Analyze and disseminate results from Cycle 1 testing • New RFI; new Test Plan • Expanded test scope (goals): • Fire/HAZMAT/disaster, SAR response • Specialized SUAS sensors • Larger, more complex operational scenarios • Counter-spoofing and anti-jamming capabilities • Airworthiness • Severe storm response pilot • RAMPS new start: Maritime testing, USCG RDC-led collaboration • Transition Plan for future funding and management structure Cycle 1, FY2012-14 Cycle 2, FY2015-16

21. Project Office, Web Links RAPS Project Support Officer: • Mr. Kevin Spence: (202) 254-2235 kevin.spence@associates.hq.dhs.gov RAPS and related Web Links: • http://www.firstresponder.govis a public-access DHS S&T website • Government employees and government-sponsored stakeholders interested in RAPS may request access to the RAPS Test Reports via http://www.firstresponder.gov, which is the gateway to access S&T’s First Responder Communities of Practicesite, https://communities.firstresponder.gov, which is the gateway to the RAPS Community of Practicesite. Access is controlled by DHS S&T and the RAPS Program Manager. • RAPS Request for information (RFI), released September 24, 2012: https://www.fbo.gov/spg/DHS/OCPO/DHS-OCPO/DHS13-01/listing.html • RAPS Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA), approved Nov. 16, 2012, was the first such document addressing unmanned aircraft ever published – anywhere in the world: http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/privacy/PIAs/privacy_pia_st_raps_nov2012.pdf

23. LESSONS LEARNED • No one platform performs well in all scenarios • Some fixed winged SUAS may need operating areas > 200 ft radius • Launch and recovery zones • Deep stall landings affected by winds • Fixed wing aircraft are very good in search and rescue and fire monitoring • Rotary winged platforms perform well in crime, accident, and arson scene investigation and in police SWAT applications • Hover ability is very beneficial • Some systems are relatively quiet, providing stealth, and can “perch” at specific locations • Quiet systems developed by the Department of Defense may need audible augmentation during search and rescue • Fuel cells provide endurance > 8 hours but require > 12 minutes to warm up prior to launch

24. LESSONS LEARNED (cont’d) • Integrated EO and IR sensors on a gimbaled platform is essential • Search and rescue scenarios are aided by ability to switch between two modes to validate targets of interest • Dual sensors are valuable in urban scenarios where shadows are prevalent • Geo-referencing EO and IR full motion video is essential • Needed for chain of custody and target of interest location accuracy • For some systems, the best way to avoid traffic may be to initiate immediate landing • Climb and descent speeds may not be sufficient to avoid collision • Rotary winged aircraft are nearing the 30-minute endurance level • Winds are not a limiting factor (fly in winds up to 30 mph) • Can maintain commanded flight profiles

25. RAPS STEERING GROUP

26. PRIVACY http://www.gigapixel.com/image/gigapan-canucks-g7.html