Thousands of unmanned aircraft systems – commonly known as drones –
could be buzzing around in U.S. airspace by 2015 because of a law passed
last year, aiding in police investigations, scientific research and
border control, but also raising safety and privacy concerns among some
lawmakers and advocacy groups.
Already, drones are in use to count sea lions in Alaska,
to conduct weather and environmental research and to monitor drug
trafficking across our borders. In fact, 327 drones already have been
licensed by the Federal Aviation Administration to fly over U.S. soil.
But the FAA expects that number to increase to 30,000 by 2020, fueling what could become a $90 billion industry.
The drones used domestically bear little resemblance to the war
machines making headlines overseas; the drones being flown in the United
States often look more like toys, and none carries weapons.
The
2012 law, called the FAA Modernization and Reform Act, contains a
seven-page provision – known as the Drone Act – requiring the FAA to
fully integrate unmanned aircraft into the National Airspace System by
September 2015. Additionally, the Drone Act allows law enforcement
agencies, including local police forces, to buy and use unmanned
aircraft for evidence gathering and surveillance.
Leonard
Montgomery, a police captain in North Little Rock, Ark., said his
department hopes to use its drones for surveillance of high-crime
neighborhoods during drug investigations and other police work.
“Mobile
drones will be able to quickly move to get a better perspective,” he
said. “They’re both faster and more flexible than any other forms of
surveillance.”
The department has one unmanned aircraft
now, an SR30 helicopter-type drone that can only be flown over
unpopulated areas while it awaits FAA rules for use over the more
populated cities.
“They will only be used in public areas where
people have no expectation of privacy,” Montgomery said. “We’re not
flying at low levels looking into your bedroom windows.”
The new technology has potential in a wide range of applications.
Mario
Mairena, spokesman for the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems
International, which lobbies on behalf of the drone industry, said
drones can provide assistance to first responders in search and rescue
missions and during or after natural or manmade disasters, and they also
can aid in scientific research.
Unmanned aircraft can be
equipped with infrared cameras, allowing responders to identify the heat
signature of a body underneath a bank of snow on a mountain or under a
pile of rubble in a disaster area.
Researchers are also using
drones. For example, the University of Alaska-Fairbanks uses them to
monitor sea lions, because the animals retreat under water when
approached by larger and louder manned craft.
Mairena also
outlined potential commercial uses for unmanned aircraft. Farmers, he
said, want to use unmanned aircraft for crop dusting and disease
detection, while oil and gas companies want to use drones to inspect
rigs and pipelines. Hollywood, too, wants to get its hands on unmanned
aircraft to capture innovative camera shots and save money on manned
aircraft costs.
A company called Darwin Aerospace has even
developed the Burrito Bomber, a drone equipped to carry and drop a
parachute-wrapped burrito, which it calls “truly the world’s first
airborne Mexican food delivery service.”
Transitioning
drones into domestic airspace has raised safety and privacy concerns.
The unmanned vehicle industry, though, thinks the benefits associated
with civil drone use outweigh any concerns.
Earlier this month, a
small drone was spotted 200 feet from a passenger airliner within
airspace controlled by John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York
City. This isolated incident may be the first of many, though, as 2020
approaches.
There are provisions in the Drone Act to protect
manned aviation – airplanes and helicopters – from unmanned flight. But
those provisions cannot prevent an inadvertent breach of controlled
airspace. Also, as the drone population grows, so do the chances of a
midair collision between two drones.
In addition to concern
over drones entering closed airspace, some worry unmanned aircraft
could have their signals interfered with or fall victim to a “spoofing”
attack.
University of Texas professor Todd Humphreys and his team
developed a software-based GPS transmitter designed to deceive – spoof –
a drone.
Humphreys said sophisticated drones have two wireless
communication linkages: the command-and-control link, which allows the
operator to control the aircraft, and the GPS navigation link, which
keeps the craft abreast of its own position. Spoofing is when a third
party targets the GPS link, through which he or she could manipulate the
drone.
Drones also are susceptible to communications jamming,
leaving the operator unable to control the aircraft. A craft with dual
linkage then would go into “lost link protocol,” which likely would
navigate the vehicle, using its remaining GPS connection, to a
pre-designated landing spot.
Unmanned aircraft already are
finding homes in local police departments and other law enforcement
agencies. The specific provision in the Drone Act authorizing law
enforcement and other government-funded entities to use drones now,
while the FAA creates final regulations for commercial use, mandates
aircraft must weigh 25 pounds or less, cannot be operated higher than
400 feet above the ground or near airports and must remain within naked
eyesight of the operator.
Right now, law enforcement can use
drones to survey anything that is visible to the human eye without a
warrant, said Amie Stepanovich, counsel at the Electronic Privacy
Information Center.
But drones can be equipped with penetrating
technology like infrared thermal imaging cameras to uncover details that
are not visible to the naked human eye.
“It is physically
impossible to hide from a drone within the typical home” if the drone is
equipped properly, she said. At this point, with the technology being
so new, Stepanovich said it is unclear whether such examinations would
be considered “searches” under the Fourth Amendment, which would require
law enforcement agencies to obtain a warrant.
Mairena
disagreed. He said the industry thinks the Fourth Amendment provides
ample protection for citizens from invasions of privacy.
“We
respect and support individuals’ rights to privacy, and if anyone is
misusing this technology, they should be punishable to the fullest
extent of the law,” he said.
The concerns related to privacy go
beyond just what drones can see. Because purchasing an unmanned aerial
vehicle is much cheaper than buying a manned one – hundreds or thousands
of dollars to buy as opposed to hundreds of thousands or millions of
dollars – law enforcement can afford to have more of them in the sky.
American
Civil Liberties Union senior policy analyst Jay Stanley said that in
American legal tradition, police don’t watch over citizens unless they
have individualized suspicion that a person is about to do something
wrong. But, he said, drones could allow police to constantly monitor
people, tracking their movements and vehicles.
The unmanned
vehicle lobby and the International Association of Chiefs of Police have
both put forth guidelines for proper drone use. The lobby’s code of
conduct includes one sentence addressing privacy that reads, “We will
respect the privacy of individuals,” but it provides no detail as to
which uses do and do not violate an individual’s right to privacy.
Rep.
Ted Poe, R-Texas, introduced the Preserving American Privacy Act last
month. It would ban all drone surveillance unless a warrant was first
obtained, except during emergencies, if consent is given by the subject
of the surveillance or within 25 miles of the border. U.S. Customs and
Border Patrol currently operates 10 Predator drones.
Virginia is
considering a two-year moratorium on drone use. Thirty other states have
introduced legislation to protect privacy and limit unmanned aircraft
use.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario